Jump to content

Talk:National Intelligence Organization

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comments

[edit]

This looks copypasted from a government site. It needs to be wikified... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.249.130.166 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Page move (2008)

[edit]

I just moved this page to conform to WP:UE, which states that English should be used for page names, unless there is a strong, documented usage of the native-language name in English-language sources. This is not the case in this instance, so the English translation should be used. Parsecboy (talk) 13:26, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List as a separate article

[edit]

After improving this article we should make the list of the chiefs a separate article. Evren Güldoğan (talk) 11:36, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move (2014)

[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: REJECTED. Per reasons stated multiple times. Thanks for your contribution. Mogumogu40 (talk) 00:55, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


National Intelligence Organization (Turkey) → Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı – Commonly reffered to as Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı or MIT. See also other languages of this page, almost all are titled Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı. Also as of 2014 there is a strong, documented usage of the native-language name in English-language sources. Relisted. BDD (talk) 19:17, 24 April 2014 (UTC) Mogumogu40 (talk) 19:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Please show evidence of the strong, documented usage of the native-language name in English-language sources - especially in comparison with the current page title (or other translations, if they are common). That would make it much easier to evaluate the case. Thanks. Dohn joe (talk) 14:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose On basis of WP:USEENGLISH. The organization calls itself the current name on the web and in English material[www.mit.gov.tr/eng]. There is also no shortage of current news[1], books[2], etc that employ the English name. " Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı" simply doesn't have the same level of usage in English[3][4].--Labattblueboy (talk) 15:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Thank you for your comments and interest. The strong documented usage as mentioned by me, can be found here: [5] [6] Please note that in English-languaged sources the Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı is commonly shortened to "MİT", from which there is a strong documented usage of. Also for example the Bundesnachrichtendienst is called German Intelligence Services in English. But the english wikipedia page is just titled as Bundesnachrichtendienst. You can also see in other languages of this article that the page name is just Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı. If not so, then the Dutch page for example would also be named as Nationale Veiligheids Organisatie (Turkije) instead of Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı. Please move this article. If you have any other questions, please tell me. Thank you very much. --Mogumogu40 (talk) 22:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not uncommon that the commonly employed acronym employed in English not match the common name in English. The recently closed discussion for International Mountaineering and Climbing Federation is a clear example of that. Although the common English name is International Mountaineering and Climbing Federation the common English acronym is UIAA, for the french name of the organization.--Labattblueboy (talk) 04:49, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blueboy is right. The first source has this content: "... Turkey's National Intelligence Organization (MİT) ...". They use MIT, but not Milli İstihbarat Teşkilatı. Such sources do not support this proposal. --B2C 19:41, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on National Intelligence Organization (Turkey). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 03:04, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on National Intelligence Organization (Turkey). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:24, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on National Intelligence Organization (Turkey). 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:52, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on National Intelligence Organization (Turkey). 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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:05, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clutter?

[edit]

User:Konli17, how is an alfabetical list more clutter than a random overlapping grouping? It's random, because why use Nato? Why not divide the countries by Blackseafor, OIC or any other seemingly random Turkey's membership of international organizations? Also why divide by countries that were (partly) inside of Ottoman Empire? Why not Seljuk Empire? This grouping also has overlapping. You have countries both in Nato as (partly) former Ottoman empire. Like Romania, Bulgaria, Albania, Hungary and Greece. The latter is for example mentioned twice in the article as "Greece: See NATO countries above."

On the other hand, alfabetical long lists are used all the time in Wiki. Such as Fiscal year. Also how is it clutter when it's easier to find, it's.. alfabetical! Unlike the current algorithm flowchart: Yes or no Nato? ⇒ If no ⇒ then proceed: Yes or no ottoman empire? ⇒ if no ⇒ then look under section "others".

So I suggest alfabetical listing or a neutral grouping such as grouping by continents. What do you think? -Randam (talk) 12:56, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

NATO has defined Turkey's military position for decades, and is its foremost supranational organisation for intelligence-sharing. Lots of former empires have proprietorial attitudes towards their former realms that influence their military and intelligence-gathering attitudes, Turkey's no different. These two associations are the most commonly referenced when Turkey's policies in these areas are discussed. Konli17 (talk) 12:54, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have 3 problems with that.
  1. Countries listed under Nato are not directly or indirectly related to Nato activities or any co-op with Nato. There is not a cohorent "story". The same can be said about Ottoman Empire. The problem with incoherent grouping is that it becomes a matter of personal taste and subjectivity. For example, one can argue that Erdogan is an Islamist that wants to unite Islamic countries (Ummah). And then group by Islamic vs Non-Islamic countries. Another person in the future might say, the nationalists are in power in Turkey now, let's group by Turkic vs Non-Turkic countries. I say this because before Erdogan, associations with Ottoman Empire was close to zero, because the political elite then could not care less about Ottoman Empire. I can come up with more "X vs Non-X" examples for grouping. Heck, dividing by subject like Gülen movement and PKK would even be more consistent as 80% is about them. If you do neutral grouping like by continents (followed by subgroups of countries), you will have a sustainable list and zero potential discussions.
  2. Mentioning the (alleged) influence of Nato and Ottoman Empire territory on the MIT policy somewhere at the top of the page should be sufficient. No need to push it forward at every possibility.
  3. Technical issues. You didn't address the issue of overlapping. It's highly discouraged to have same sections twice in an article. It's also not a common practice to divide groups by "X vs Non-X" followed by "Y vs Non-Y" etc. -Randam (talk) 20:38, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 19 September 2021

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jstor shows the Turkish entity receives more attention in English-languages sources due to Turkey's geopolitical role. It thus has a long-term significance that the Papua New Guinean counterpart has yet to demonstrate. WP:RMCI provides little in the way of countering systemic bias in the very WP:RS Wikipedia bases its content on. (non-admin closure) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:38, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

National Intelligence Organization (Turkey) → National Intelligence Organization – I think we should remove the name Turkey in brackets because there is only one other organization with the same name. For other countries' intelligence agencies which has the same name as an other countries agency, the bigger agency just have their name without country name in Wikipedia. For example you can look at Federal Intelligence Service. There are two agencies with the same name, one Swiss and one German. Since the Swiss one is not as significant as the German one, the German one have the title in Wikipedia. A similar case is present here in my opinion. Katakana546 (talk) 19:10, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with the change per nom.. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 00:44, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. I was originally thinking that this could cause issues but if the only other one that exists is one for Papua New Guinea then if this one is the more well known and viewed one then the (Turkey) part should be dropped. ― Blaze The WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#0001 13:25, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If the term were "fairly generic", chances are we'd have more than two articles named for it.
The "systemic bias" that Wikipedia has is to make popular articles easier to find than less popular ones. We save the vast majority of readers need to navigate a disambiguation page, at the expense of the tiny minority who load a page they don't want (and navigate via a hatnote).
Supporting stats
It's erroneous to !vote on page views statistics that don't include views of the DAB itself. In this case, the less-viewed Papua New Guinea page gets (over the last 90 days) over ten times as many hits as the DAB: 586:55, so at least 90% of its readership gets to the article without looking at the DAB at all (e.g. by some search mechanism, following an internal or external link, loading from a browser bookmark).

It's probably higher, since not everyone viewing the DAB will go on to view the Papua New Guinea page: if we assume that 100% of readers click through the DAB to one of the two articles, and in the same proportion as their page views (55:586:15254), then only 586⁄15254 × 55 = 2.111 readers every 90 days get to the National Intelligence Organization (Papua New Guinea) via the DAB.

At the same time, 52.888 readers have been inconvenienced by having to navigate a DAB page to get to the Turkey article (but that's only 0.35% of its readership).

I've excluded other inconveniences such that the Turkey page is around 64 Kb whereas the Papua New Guinea one is about 3.5 Kb, but since hatnotes appear at the very top of a page, and since all modern browsers load and render pages incrementally, an impatient or quickwitted user need not wait for the entire page to load before clicking the hatnote.
85.67.32.244 (talk) 20:45, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:52, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Doctor Ibrahima Kalil Camara PhD

[edit]

United States Of America Embassy Conakry 41.77.188.2 (talk) 14:29, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:National_Intelligence_Organization&oldid=1200348268"