Talk:Afro Turks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Afro-Turk)
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject African diaspora (Rated Stub-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Turkey (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Ethnic groups (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities 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.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

THİS ARTİCLE İS THE LİVİNG PROOF THAT WİKİPEDİA SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN SERİOUSLY AS A SOURCE OF İNFORMATİON[edit]

Study of ethnic demographics in Turkey is a widely studied, deeply researched and publicly published area of academic study. And there are many avaliable credible sources and papres you can easily find in the internet, just google it you can finds TONS of data from credible academic sources, AND NONE OF THOSE SOURCES LİST AFRO-TURKS AS A MİNORİTY GROUP İN TURKEY. NONE OF THEM ACKNOWLEDGE THİS GROUP'S EXİSTENSE. (here, for those who won't even google it, here's a link for you: http://www.joshuaproject.net/countries.php?rog3=TU there are many,many more...)And in some of these sources you can even find very low-populated, smallest groups like Chaldeans, White Russians who migrated during Bolshevic revolution or Polish immigrants who migrated during Napoleonic Wars. These groups almost do not exist today, only a handful of people, and they are listed. But no Afro-Turks... I wonder why is it? Either this wiki article is a forgery or there is a wide-spread international conspiracy to deny existence of Afro-Turks. And yet, wikipedia does not delete this stupid article. what does this say about this institution's credibily? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.96.117.239 (talk) 14:48, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


WİLL SOMEONE PLEASE END THİS NONSENSE!!![edit]

I BEG WİKİPERDİA MODERATORS TO BOTHER, JUST FOR SEVERAL MİNUTES, TO LOOK AT ANY RELİABLE SOURCE(CİA FACTBOOK, ANY KİND OF REAL ENCYCLOPEDİA, GEOGRAPHY BOOK OR SOMETHİNG) OF ETHNİC STUDİES ON TURKEY ; AND THEN REMOVE THİS ABSURD ARTİCLE FOR ONCE AND FOR ALL!!! 2.000.000 AFRO-TURKS! AND BASED ON WHAT? SOME NEWSPAPER ARTİCLES (WHİCH, BY THE WAY, SOURCED THEMSELVES FROM THİS STUPİD WİKİ ARTİCLE!!!) IF THAT İS ACCEPTABEL THEN I GUESS THERE REAALY ARE ALLİGATORS ON NEW YORK SEWERS, AFTER ALL NATİONAL İNQUİRER WROTE THOUSANDS OF ARTİCLES ABOUT THEM!!!!!! DON'T BE ACCESORY TO VALİDATE A MAD MAN'S DELUSİONS AND MAKE US WİKİ READERS BELİEVE İN THİS İNSTİTUTİON AGAİN.

I agree with you brother. This article exists and is being promoted purely for political correctness (or should I say racial correctness). The name , population and existence of this group are all inventions to promote that purpose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.231.116.82 (talk) 20:26, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

It is real hard to explain away the communities in Turkey today such as Manavgat, Dalaman and areas surrounding Izmir. I am a "Black" American married to a Turkish national (with an additional residence in Antalya for the past 10 years). Funny thing, IGNORANCE, RACISIM and institutional bias/programming exists with all cultures, ethnic groups and people world-wide. In this case, modern day "Turks" are certainly no exception. Turks are comprised of vast cultures and ethinc groups! Sort of like assuming an African is only "black"...Truth is, there are "white" ones, Indo-Asian, and other cultures which are also African. Time for a reality check. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.17.117.250 (talk) 21:31, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

This whole thing is one giant dreamt up piece of crap. and you can tell that some igorant black americans wrote it, with this and that about slavery and racism. Ugh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.27.60.111 (talk) 12:17, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Bigotry and "dreamt up" delusions will not go anywhere, and will certainly NOT change the facts and history today or tomorrow (Ugh). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.214.124.22 (talk) 17:25, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Bigger the lie, more people tend to believe it. I guess this myth will pass for a fact in this age of disinformation. Very interesting to witness this kind of social experiment on nature of the truth. I congragulate whoever came up with this mock article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.97.112.246 (talk) 01:02, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Correct usage of terms?[edit]

It doesn't make sense to refer to Smyrna as Izmir before the year 1930, since during the Ottoman Empire the city was officially named Smyrna. It was not renamed Izmir until the 1930 Turkish Postal Service Law that renamed Constantinople to Istanbul as well as other Greek-named cities, including Smyrna. Not very encyclopedic.

Izmir is the official and correct name of the city since 12th century. And don't get your hopes up that one day it will change back to Smyrna. We know why you westerners insist using antique(literally those Ionıan -not Greek-names have not been used by anyone since Late Antiquity) names of those places in Turkey. But it will not pass. We, Turks, are living in these lands since 10th century and will keep living since the end of time. You tried your luck after W.W.1. and got defeated and humiliated. So there is no point living in a dream world. You might want to talk to a shrink about these delusions ;) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.97.112.246 (talk) 00:58, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments[edit]

I must say that when I went on holiday to Istanbul, I didn't see many Afro-Turks at all, there is 2 million? More like 20!Luckystars 14:11, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I think Olpak's estimate is an estimate on the number of Turkish people with roots (partially) from all over Africa, not just sub-Sahara, nor just black ones. It seems still to be an exaggeration. Charlize Theron and Jason Kidd come to my mind when I think of 'African-Americans' that are not so black. 13:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Joke article?[edit]

I strongly suspect this article is intended as a joke. I am a man who lived in Turkey for three years and consider myself well versed with the country and its people. Im telling you, you're about as likely to run into a Black person in Turkey as you are in North Korea or Kazakhstan. Two million sounds very, very far fetched indeed. More like a prank —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cankore (talkcontribs) 03:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

this is most certainly a joke! I lived in Turkey all my life and I never met a Afro-turk. Two million!!! I am aware that there is a handful of people (like one or two villages) in south who are african descent but that is all.85.97.115.120 (talk) 06:34, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I have met a couple of Afro-Turks in Istanbul so this isnt a joke article :)
claiming that this is a joke article proves that you two dont know anything about the history of Turkey Redman19 (talk) 17:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

You can find a handful of blacks in Istanbul, but these people are immigrants (many of them illegal) who have no connection to Turkey or Turkish history. There are no native blacks or a people called "Afro-Turks". Most Turks have never seen a single black person in their entire lives, besides on TV. This is why wikipedia isnt taken seriously anywhere in academic circles. It is an open source where anyone can write anything and even invent an entire group of people numbering 2 million. How ridiculous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.228.162.122 (talk) 11:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=141522
read this source and see how wrong you are my friend
Redman19 (talk) 13:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

If you look deeper into the edit history, this wikipedia article was created on 12 April 2006. Everything mentioned about these so called "Afro-Turks" appears only after this wikipedia article was created. Basically this group was invented on wikipedia and people (including the journalist who wrote that article) picked it up from here. It all comes down to shoddy journalism by Zaman. Zaman even uses the exact language that appears in earlier versions of the wikipedia article. It is obvious that they got their information from here.

Only in İstanbul, Ankara, İzmir or any of the large cities will you even see a single Black person in Turkey and those are African immigrants. Not so called "Afro-Turks".The word "Afro" doesnt even exist in Turkish; it would be "Afrikalı". You seems to think it is some kind of fad to be black or something like that. Not in factual information. --78.129.226.148 (talk) 05:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

In Turkish they call these people arap
Afro-Turks is the English translation of that word
because you guys never saw these people that doenst mean they dont excist
Redman19 (talk) 14:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I am a turkish from antalya. you dont get black turks. his website is the first time i have ever heard of it. so this is really a kind of joke. (Batuhan) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.19.3.253 (talk) 07:06, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I do not want to fall of-subject but there are several (few) black people living in North-Korea & West-Turkestan (Kazakhstan), not that much but there are a few. When i was in Istanbul (Former Constantinople) i saw many Africans (Nigerians) living there. --82.134.154.25 (talk) 20:18, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Those Nigerians are illegal immigrants who came to Turkley recently to look for a better life; not imaginary Afro-Turks who migrated hundreds of years ago with a population of 2.000.000!!!!!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.97.64.29 (talk) 14:12, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Anyone claiming to reside in Turkey for three years without the knowledge of "Turks" with African ancestory strongly proves they are not nearly as versed with the society as pontificated. These individuals also lack congruent factual cultural history and perhaps, much of the reality of the Ottoman Empire and civilization. This is not surprising, most "Turks" do as well... a bit similiar to Americans or Asians in denial of cruciable parts of their history equally. Denial and IGNORANCE does little in changing reality (only distorting it)... On the other-hand, arrogance does show how little one knows, trusting in only what they seem to see with limited vision. Wake up call: What is perceived visually certainly does not constitute absolute truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.214.124.22 (talk) 17:41, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Partial rewrite/additional references[edit]

What kind of an "encyclopedia" uses newspaper articles as a valid source? Even worse, most of those papers use this ridiculous wikipedia article as their source for those stories. This is a pathetic vicious circle of misinformation and hearsay! when will this stupid article be deleted? 85.97.66.113 (talk) 22:08, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

I've rewritten some parts of the article and provided some additional references. While some may disagree with Olpak's assertions, they are appropriately listed here now as such. I've left the info from Zaman as the arguments against it are not proof that they aren't true (or possible both from a secondary source), and according to Wikipedia:Sources, Zaman can be considered credible.

Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 18:09, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I can not believe this article is still here. I think this example proves that wikipedia can only be a parody of a valid source of information. Some delusional attention seeker creates a myth and tells it to a journalist who needs to find interesting bullshit to sell papers and...abrakadabra! suddenly there are 2 million african turks! But I guess if it's published then it must be true. I think UFOs must have abducted those two million people since noone in Turkey ever saw or or ever heard of one! 85.102.184.47 (talk) 22:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


you are a funny man because you didnt see those people they dont excist go tell your jokes elsewere Redman19 (talk) 10:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

What kind of an "encyclopedia" uses newspaper articles as a valid source? Even worse, most of those papers use this ridiculous wikipedia article as their source for those stories. This is a pathetic vicious circle of misinformation and hearsay! when will this stupid article be deleted?

p.s.:I guess mr.redman19 is the artichect of this idiocy and thinks calling people names will make his lies a reality. 85.97.66.113 (talk) 22:11, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

People would much rather trash talk on here than look at real life. Or at the example link that Redman provided showing there is existence of these communities --- big or small, it doesn't matter. They exist, and there's nothing one can change about it. It's when silly people who insist on denying this that motivate people of African-Turkish ancestry to form strong, ethnic organizations in defense of their dignity and have pride in their heritage. Tell me, why does it matter so much?

98.114.153.199 (talk) 04:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC)


Huh ? The burden of proof is on the person making the claims. And there's nothing going for this pseudo-article which is based entirely on the verbal diarrhoea of a attention-seeking delusional madman with an inferiority complex about his childhood. There are plenty of reliable ethnographic studies available on Turkey- you can look them up and you will find no mention of this rubbish. If you still don't beleive those, you can get a flight to Turkey and go look for your phantom "millions of blacks"-you wont find them. The article should be deleted or else reworked into one about recent African immigrants in Turkey like the other articles in this particular category (like with Greece which shares much of its modern history with Turkey - but there's nothing about millions of "Afro-Greeks" because like in Turkey they simply dont exist ). Good night —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.27.60.111 (talk) 01:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

This is ridiculous - the definition and the population figure[edit]

What an Afro-Turk is, is not clearly defined. Judging by examples here, I assume it's the ones who look black/African, but anyone with the slightest idea about Turkey knows that 1 out of 20 people in Turkey do not look like that. There is a serious misinformation here. Even if Mustafa Olpak inflates the numbers and considers anyone who is remotely associated with Africans in Turkey as Afro Turks he can't reach numbers like 2 million or 3 million. It's common knowledge that there are a handful of villages populated by "Afro-Turks" so this 20,000 figure sounds reasonable.

By the way, I am not sure if the term, Afro-Turks, should be used in this article at all. --Mttll (talk) 13:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that you can't read Turkish. Hürriyet says that 20,000 live around Ortaca and neighbouring districts. What about the figure 800,000 given by Sabah? Does that one sound "reasonable" enough or will you say that this is another purposeful inflation? Behemoth (talk) 00:59, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

The very term is quite ambiguous and not suitable for an encyclopedia if you ask me. I guess Turkey's high population encourages people to claim absurd figures.--Mttll (talk) 10:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree totally. and as I can see from this talk page, it is time that something should be done about this pseudo-article. are wikipedia editors sleeping? where is the integrity of this instutition? After seeing this, how can I ever trust any of the information in this encyclopedia? If footnoting a couple of newspaper articles(which only are about some claims made by some guy, they don't present this story as a fact) is enough to make this article legitimate, then I think holocoust deniers will be very happy to hear that. after all there are thousands of books full of nonsense which they can footnote to. 85.101.63.62 (talk) 23:50, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Mustafa Olpak is to be taken as seriously as an any enthusiastic Armenian chauvinist who believes there are 10+ million "secret" Armenians in Turkey. You can find things like that in Internet. Turkey's high population makes people claim absurd things. Look at the examples: Esmeray, Hadi Türkmen... Are there 3 million of these people in Turkey? Aegean region has a population of 10 million. Are 1 out of 3 people are black Africans? Excuse me? What kind of nonsense is this?

Mustafa Olpak sits home and has some issues about himself obviously, makes ridiculous estimates and speaks on behalf of others. Should a person with 1/32 "Afro-Turk" (what a stupid term, I can't stress this enough) ancestry be considered Afro-Turk? (Not that there are that many people with partial Afro-Turk ancestry) Really? Who says so? There are surveys about ethnic identify, nobody identifies himself as so.

Read the content of his articles. He has zero evidence and whines about "not being recognized" by the rest of the society. I'll tell you why they aren't recognized: Their numbers are merely in thousands and there are only handful of villages that are populated by Afro-Turks.

You may say I'm pushing a POV, but in case the very existence of this article is a POV--Mttll (talk) 16:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

What you're doing is:
1 - Removing sourced material.
2 - Purposefully misquoting sources.
3 - Starting an edit war.
4 - Vandalism. Behemoth (talk) 16:28, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
5 - Editing your talk page to delete my notice. Behemoth (talk) 16:32, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

1 - Removing sourced material.

With good reasons. I have explained them. There is huge misinformation in this article.


2 - Purposefully misquoting sources.

I didn't quote at all. Yes, the source talks about Mugla region which is where this (tiny) Afro-Turk community mainly lives.

3 - Starting an edit war.

What am I supposed to do?

4 - Vandalism.

No, my intention is completely genuine.

5 - Editing your talk page to delete my notice.

I am not allowed to do that?--Mttll (talk) 17:01, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

1 - Removing sourced material. Not only the population figures but also the regions where Afro-Turks live, the current composition of Afro-Turkish population. Also not only the estimates by Olpak but the estimate given by Sabah. The article states these figures are claims by the sources mentioned. If you have another estimate, just give the source for it and place it among other population figures.

2 - Purposefully misquoting sources. What you tried to do was manipulating the content of the article. It's the first time you admit that Hürriyet's figure is only about Muğla's some districts. Your statement that this community "mainly" lives in these districts also reveals why you continue to remove the sourced information about the provinces where this community lives.

3 - Starting an edit war. You should try to solve the disputes through discussion.

4 - Vandalism. Removing sourced material without an agreement reached by opposing parties is genuine vandalism.

5 - Editing your talk page to delete my notice. It means that you don't take my notice seriously. Sent a new one anyway. Behemoth (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Maybe Olpak should lead a million man march to Ankara to demand rights and recognition. He should be able to easily muster that from his claimed 3 million ""Afro-Turks" lol. What kind of joke i this guy trying to pull off

I cannot believe this bullshit article still exists. This is a good reminder that wikipedia is not to be taken serously. joke of an encyclopedia!!! two millon afro-turks!!! I guess why I can not see them is because of all those 20 million chinise-Turks and 50 million eskimo-turks and 70 million indian-turks!!! a mere two million people of african descents just must escape the eye in all that crowd!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.174.29.199 (talk) 13:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Who is an Afro-Turk?[edit]

Until this question is answered, I will be forced to "vandalize" the article. The population figures can be incredibly misleading. Especially when we consider the given examples of Afro Turks here.--Mttll (talk) 17:28, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I think I'll remove the infobox for now. It gives a totally false impression as if these are established, common knowledge facts when they are speculation. The very existence of this article (including the name) is under question. I hope you will not consider this a "removal of content" because it's not.--Mttll (talk) 17:36, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I am partially restoring the infobox. While there are many speculative arguments here, there is no evidence against what the article says or disproving anything. The article is well-sourced. However, in light of your comments and the controversy, I think it makes good sense to leave the population in the infobox as unknown, but leave the text in the body of the article that refers to Olpak's estimates.
Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 13:34, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

The funniest yet saddest thing[edit]

The funniest yet saddest thing is that this so-called "encylopedia article" is using "sources" that themselves copied from it. In other words, it uses circular sourcing. The entire article was built on original research. Some people (including the delusional Mr Olpak) read about it for the first time on wikipedia. Olpak gives a few interviews to some newspapers who are desperate for something different to print and voila, you suddenly have 2 million of these "Afro Turks" (they must be invisible cos I dont see them anywhere). The proof is easily seen by looking at the date this article was created and the earliest versions of the article. The newspaper articles printed after the creation of this article (that are being being used as sources) use the exact same text as that of this "encylopedia" article as it existed at the time. So much for wikipedia being a reliable source of information.

Here you can read and see the real ethnic groups in Turkey which are Turks Kurds, Arabs, Gypsies(Cingene), Circassians (North Caucasus originated people), Armenians and jews . http://countrystudies.us/turkey/ Where are those 2 million "Afro Turks"? They only exist in Olpak's mind

Mr. Olpak is a renowned writer on the subject and more recently a contributor and informant for a Tarih Vakfı project on this very issue. Calling Olpak "delusional" (only because his estimates are found too inflated) will not refute the existence of Afro-Turks. If you feel like finding sources saying that no such group lives in Turkey, please provide them. Also, please sign your comments. Behemoth (talk) 02:21, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

you are Olpak aren't you behemoth?! If you are, I want to congragulate you for this wonderful, excellent, genius, one in a million April's Fools day joke! I guess what they say is true: bigger the lie, more people believe it! Actually this gave me an idea: I will follow your example and create an article in wikipaedia about İrish-turks who came to Turkey in 18th century to escape from british opression and formed a colony in...er...near the Black sea and they are about...hmmm...only 40 million now. yes I liked that, if anyone buys this crap, I can start a Irısh-turk culture foundation. Maybe I can get Bono to promote our cause. thamk you for inspiring me!195.174.29.199 (talk) 14:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC) sad that you can't even accept your own people.173.62.220.251 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:38, 27 February 2010 (UTC).

POV, personal translation, & self-published, foreign language website[edit]

You are adding some audaciously false and blatantly inaccurate information which you claim is well-translated from some foreign language website. There are several problems with your edits:

  • Wikipedia states that English language sources are preferred over non-English sources & that translations from reliable sources are preferred over those of Wiki editors:

"English-language sources are preferable to sources in other languages so that readers can easily verify the content of the article. However, sources in other languages are acceptable where an English equivalent is not available. Where editors translate a direct quotation, they should quote the relevant portion of the original text in a footnote or in the article. Translations published by reliable sources are preferred over translations made by Wikipedia editors."

  • Wikipedia does not allow personal websites, except in certain cases, which the creators of that foreign language website you cite fail to meet:

"Anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason self-published media, whether books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, Internet forum postings, tweets etc., are largely not acceptable.[1]

Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. However, caution should be exercised when using such sources: if the information in question is really worth reporting, someone else is likely to have done so.

Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons, even if the author is a well-known professional researcher or writer; see WP:BLP#Reliable sources."

"Certain red flags should prompt editors to examine the sources for a given claim:

* surprising or apparently important claims not covered by mainstream sources;

* reports of a statement by someone that seems out of character, embarrassing, controversial, or against an interest they had previously defended;

* claims that are contradicted by the prevailing view within the relevant community, or which would significantly alter mainstream assumptions, especially in science, medicine, history, politics, and biographies of living persons. This is especially true when proponents consider that there is a conspiracy to silence them.

Exceptional claims in Wikipedia require high-quality sources.[2] If such sources are not available, the material should not be included. Also be sure to adhere to other policies, such as the policy for biographies of living persons and the undue weight provision of Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

  • I have already directed you to sourced information on the Arab Slave Trade article from doyens of Somali Studies that directly contradicts what you're claiming i.e. factual information from established experts in the field in question, not some self-published website with not one source cited to back up its outlandish claims. Since, for whatever reason you refuse to respect that actually sourced, authoritative & factual information, here it is again so that you cannot claim to have missed it:

"Although Chinese slave traders bought slaves (Seng Chi i.e. the Zanj[3]) from Arab intermediaries and "stocked up" directly in coastal areas of present-day Somalia, the local Somalis -- referred to as Baribah and Barbaroi (Berbers) by medieval Arab and ancient Greek geographers, respectively (see Periplus of the Erythraean Sea),[4][5][6] and no strangers to capturing, owning and trading slaves themselves[7] -- were not among them[8]:

One important commodity being transported by the Arab dhows to Somalia was slaves from other parts of East Africa. During the nineteenth century, the East African slave trade grew enormously due to demands by Arabs, Portuguese, and French. Slave traders and raiders moved throughout eastern and central Africa to meet the rising demand for enslaved men, women, and children. Somalia did not supply slaves -- as part of the Islamic world Somalis were at least nominally protected by the religious tenet that free Muslims cannot be enslaved -- but Arab dhows loaded with human cargo continually visited Somali ports.[9]

Slave labor in East Africa was drawn exclusively from the Zanj, who were Negroid Bantu-speaking peoples that lived along the East African coast in an area roughly comprising modern-day Tanzania, Mozambique and Malawi.[4][10] "

That's why I reverted you. And I will continue to do so if you keep adding this blatantly untrue information, which a Wiki editor personally translated from a low quality, inexpert, non-English & completely unreferenced personal website to boot. Middayexpress (talk) 20:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

The english translation for Afrika kökenli Türkler is Turks with African roots/origin. Now i am assuming your contention is with the term Afrika kökenli Türkler and not the translation? What confuses me is why delete the translation and not the term? If you have a problem with the term then discuss it with the editor who added it, my involvement is only providing an English translation for it. If it's not the term your disputing then you have utterly lost me. Xaghan (talk) 20:58, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Continent in the African Diaspora Box.[edit]

Turkey is an Asian (Excluding East-Thrace) country, But is considered European. I suggest we (better) move it to Asia. --82.134.154.25 (talk) 20:15, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Böyle bir saçmalık görmedim[edit]

Sanki bizimle dalga geçiliyor. Bunlar nerede oturuyorlar, hiç görmedim iki milyon (!) var mı ? Off bey gerçekten —Preceding unsigned comment added by Turanbekin (talkcontribs) 23:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

A little proof[edit]

Evidence of Afro-Turks (They have been living in İzmir for 350 years)

http://alkislarlayasiyorum.com/icerik/90971/izmirde-bir-zenci-mahallesi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.171.204.250 (talk) 16:56, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Tracey Emin[edit]

I don't think English white ladies with one black Ottoman great-grandfather should be included in a list of "Afro-Turks". Anyway cool article, I hope someone finds the time and means to expand it. I also am skeptical of the two million claim -- I guess there's a lot of demographic work to be done, though. 07:18, 21 December 2015 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.201.166.50 (talk)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Afro Turks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:22, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Afro Turks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:53, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ "Blogs" in this context refers to personal and group blogs. Some newspapers host interactive columns that they call blogs, and these may be acceptable as sources so long as the writers are professionals and the blog is subject to the newspaper's full editorial control. Where a news organization publishes the opinions of a professional but claims no responsibility for the opinions, the writer of the cited piece should be attributed (e.g. "Jane Smith has suggested..."). Posts left by readers may never be used as sources.
  2. ^ This idea—that exceptional claims require exceptional sources—has an intellectual history which traces back through the Enlightenment. In 1758, David Hume wrote in An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding: "No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish." (available here at Project Gutenberg)
  3. ^ Roland Oliver, Africa in the Iron Age: c.500 BC-1400 AD, (Cambridge University Press: 1975), p.192
  4. ^ a b F.R.C. Bagley et al., The Last Great Muslim Empires, (Brill: 1997), p.174
  5. ^ Cite error: The named reference Mohamed_Diriye_Abdullahi_2001_p.13 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  6. ^ James Hastings, Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics Part 12: V. 12, (Kessinger Publishing, LLC: 2003), p.490
  7. ^ Henry Louis Gates, Africana: The Encyclopedia of the African and African American Experience, (Oxford University Press: 1999), p.1746
  8. ^ David D. Laitin, Politics, Language, and Thought: The Somali Experience, (University Of Chicago Press: 1977), p.52
  9. ^ Catherine Lowe Besteman, Unraveling Somalia: Race, Class, and the Legacy of Slavery, (University of Pennsylvania Press: 1999), p. 51
  10. ^ Cite error: The named reference Ogot was invoked but never defined (see the help page).