Talk:Samos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Name of Samos Island[edit]

≈The inclusion of the name of Samos island in the Turkish language located at the top of the Samos Island page, (therefore of prominent importance), is quite irrelevant. As an inhabitant of Samos Island I find this piece of information to be misrepresenting and offensive.

Samos is a Greek island with Greek inhabitants since antiquity. Unlike other islands/cities or places in Greece (i.e. Kos, Crete, Rhodes) Samos was never inhabited by people of Turkish decent. Samos, was under Ottoman power over a century ago as a semi-independent state with special privileges; the only Ottomans/Turks on the island were just limited to a small guard. The secular modern state of Turkey created after the fall of the Ottoman empire and long after the war of independence of Greece and Samos. Therefore according to historical facts there is no reason to state any other names for Samos apart from that which is Greek and recognised all around the world since antiquity. The controversial claims of some Turkish politicians in recent years over the Aegean and Greek islands make this sort of misleading piece of information even more dangerous. I kindly request that under these circumstances and within the context of the encyclopedic information presented by Wikipedia that the Turkish name of Samos be excluded from the Samos Island page. Historical facts clearly prove thet there is no justification for the inclusion of a name that is just a poor anagram of the original and historic Greek name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Efpalinos (talkcontribs) 15:56, 12 October 2006 I couldn't agree more with the previous remarks about Samos name. I don't understand the importance of knowing how a Turk would call Samos? Likewise why should'n we know how would a Chinese call Samos or an Arab. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tasosamos (talkcontribs) 17:10, 12 October 2006

I totally agree with the comments above. As an inhabitant of Samos island I find the inclusion the the Turkish names misleading and offensive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Euthymia (talkcontribs) 14:13, 10 April 2

Really? Well, would you be so kind as to remove the Greek names from Izmir, Giresun, Istanbul, Canakkale? :) That's just how it is for the moment, maybe the Wikipedia-wide agreement can change in the future.. Baristarim 14:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Let me guess. Is it because the Greeks were the first to built these cities? --Odysses () 07:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Not relevant as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Baristarim 07:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Not relevant? This is the English wikipedia. The reader here would be more interested to read about Troy (Τροία) than your above mentioned Canakkale. --Odysses () 08:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I was talking about what you mentioned not being relevant to the articles in Wikipedia having alternate names in the lead. In any case, you are really beating a dead horse with this: this issue has come up numerous times in tens of thousands of articles, not just Greco-Turkish ones - in fact this issue became famous when it came up in Danzig/Gdansk. I have also had many problems with it, but it is a wiki-wide thing, so not much we can do about it for the moment. On the other hand, please refrain from doing Point edits like adding the Chinese name, they are considered disruptive and might lead to blocks. thanks Baristarim 08:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm afraid you make no sense. I just don't see why is it so important in the English wikipedia for Samos to have "the Turkish name", but not so important for other Greek islands, like Lemnos, Paros, Kythira, Andros. There must be a reason for this. Anyway, I've added the Italian name too. --Odysses () 08:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Well, I also agree that the alternate name usage in the lead doesn't make sense - but for all articles. Anyways, this has been discussed many times. Italian name is fine. As for the other articles, I am sure they were there before but someone removed them :) I tried to get people to discuss this before, but many people don't seem to be interested. Baristarim 09:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
The Ottoman name of Samos is important; after all, Samos was part of the Ottoman Empire for some 400 years. The modern Turkish name is not particularly relevant (Samos was never controlled by the Republic of Turkey and does not have a Turkish-speaking population), but it is a useful transcription of the Ottoman name. --Macrakis 15:22, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Macrakis, what makes you think that the average English-speaking reader would be interested to know the Ottoman name of Samos? --Odysses () 08:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
The average English-speaking reader wouldn't be interested in the Greek name of Canakkale in the lead - the etymology section is better suited for that. But that's just the way it is, really... Baristarim 09:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
My point exactly. It's not important to have the Greek name of Canakkale, and there isn't any Greek name of Canakkale. Who cares about Τσανάκαλε? :-) --Odysses () 09:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure who this "average English-speaking reader" of the Samos or Canakkale article is. One reader might be interested in the policy on topless beaches, another in Ottoman history, another in endemic species of hawk. All are legitimate encyclopedic topics. The topless-beach and the bird-watcher readers probably don't care that Canakkale was formerly called Kale-i-Sultani or Dardanelles (in English and I think in Greek as well) and that half its population was non-Muslim in 1910, or that Samos was called Sisam in Ottoman Turkish and was a quasi-independent principality under the Ottomans. But presumably the history reader does care. --Macrakis 14:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Samos was indeed occupied by Turks, Genoese, Romans, and Persians in the past. A rare case of "history reader" might want to see all the names of the island used by the occupants. I see no point in giving the various names used during the occupation. Likewise, Córdoba and Seville were occupied by Moors, but they don't display the Arabic name in their articles. Since Samos now belongs to the Greek State, there is no reason for other names. Should you wish, you could add the Ottoman name under the "Ottoman Rule" section. --Odysses () 16:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Odysses, first of all, please stop trolling with terms like "occupied" or "liberated". We try to take a neutral perspective on this, and say "ruled" and "taken". Or do you want the Turks to start saying that Smyrna/Izmir was "liberated" by the Turks in 1923 etc.?
The Arabic name of Seville is certainly interesting, and sure enough, there it is in the article, أشبيليّة, not in the header to be sure. I agree that it makes as much sense to put the Ottoman name in the history section as in the header, but we seem to have settled on putting historical and minority names in the headers. This has been a long long discussion, and I really don't want to start seeing edit wars again about the Greek names of Bitola, Diyarbakır, Constanţa, etc., the Turkish names of Constanţa, Thessaloniki (discussed in the second paragraph), Alexandroupoli, etc.
By the way, it does not make it seem as though you are discussing in good faith when you revert the article unilaterally, not even moving the Ottoman name to the history section. --Macrakis 17:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Macrakis, it is my intention to discuss in good faith and from a neutral perspective. In fact, we just had a friendly agreement with Baristarim to add the Italian name also, but you've just removed. Giving the name in several languages it would look okay. Besides, not even the Turkish article indicates the Ottoman name. I wouldn't mind moving the Ottoman name to the history section if it's okay with you. --Odysses () 18:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
The Turkish article uses the name Sisam, which is the same as the Ottoman name (though of course in a different script). And then, many modern Turks are indifferent to the Ottomans (or even hostile). Moving to the history section is fine with me. But will you and other editors be as happy when the Greek name of Izmir, etc. gets moved to the history section? --Macrakis 19:17, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I've made a search in wikipedia for any standardization of names of places or cities, but it doesn't seem to be a fixed standard. Some cities indicate the name in:

English alone: Cartagena Cádiz Gibraltar Ancona

English + Local: Milan Rome Vienna Budapest Corinth Florence Genoa Ostend Prague

English + Local + Greek or Latin: Naples Nice Gallipoli Assisi Bologna

Various: Corfu Edirne Geneva Venice Zürich

There is also an article Turkish exonyms, also Names of European cities in different languages: A, where one can add names in all other languages.

I still think it's inappropriate to have the Ottoman name at the beginning of the article, since it's not in a living alphabet, so I moved it to the history section. Odysses () 11:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Deficient map[edit]

I think the map should be improved so that it doesn't give the impression that a large sea exists to the east of Samos. (I'm posting this also on the talk page of the image itself at Commons.) __meco 09:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Notable[edit]

Under "Notable People", Aristarchos should be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.4.21 (talk) 11:10, 12 December 2007 (UTC) He is mentioned under "Famous Samians". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.4.21 (talk) 11:28, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Samos Links[edit]

Please refrain from removing useful links at the bottom of Samos page. Samos Society of Active Citizens is an NGO formed by Samians living in Samos. Please do not remove the link to their blog and discussions, it is there to offer useful information and opinions about various issues. --Efpalinos

If the website is .com it represents spam and must be deleted following the guidlines of WP:EL. An NGO should be able to justify a .org site which might qualify for inclusion. There is religious and political spam which still might not qualify.Student7 (talk) 01:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
That's a blog. El Greco(talk) 01:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Samos Society of Active Citizens is a newly formed NGO. The guidelines state: "Links to blogs and personal web pages, except those written by a recognized authority." As an NGO I believe it is a recognized authority. There are no malevolent posts in this blog. It provides a platform for discussion mainly on current environmental, health, social and generally issues regarding the quality of life in Samos. There are absolutely no political, religious or any other personal issues expressed in this site. It is also clear from my personal comments here that this link I placed is not spam. Therefore I kindly request that you restore the link. --Efpalinos —Preceding comment was added at 10:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll have to leave it to El Greco to judge its quality, but for English speakers, the webpage would seem to be of limited use. Great for the Greek language Wikipedia maybe. Why English? Student7 (talk) 15:29, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
And again, instead of blaming the messengers, the question still hasn't been answered as to why this wonderful, noteworthy, phenomenal NGO is doing with a website on a .com webpage when it should be someplace else. Student7 (talk) 16:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)


As stated before Samos Society of Active Citizens is a newly formed NGO! We don't have a website yet just this blog. I don't see any limitations in wikipedia guidelines in regards to that or to language. There are other sites too in English wikipedia with non English links. So quite frankly I don't understand all this animosity and irony. --Efpalinos —Preceding comment was added at 09:06, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Have you looked at WP:EL? This might help in deciding whether the site belongs or not. Blogs are not permitted. They are not edited (like we are). We want to provide at least as high a quality external link as our own material. Also, you may have a point of view which makes it difficult to decide. Another site you may wish to read is WP:POV. With points of view, it is sometimes better to contribute it and then let others decide. Here we have two editors who have absolutely nothing against your organization. We are totally unbiased. Neither of us thinks the link should be here. Is it possible that we could be right? Student7 (talk) 13:00, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Ottoman rule[edit]

This is getting full of good information.

Question: could you be more precise about what the governor did under Ottoman rule? It looks like the prince "held the executive power." The legislature passed laws. The prince probably enforced the laws he liked and ignored the ones he didn't! But anyway, I don't see a role for the governor unless it was "figurehead." I think this should be made clearer with a reference to his precise (and real, never mind what people wanted to think) role. Would be nice in English but Greek okay. Student7 (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Size, economy[edit]

Both the rank of the island and the economy changed when I looked them up, from "common knowledge." Generally "common knowledge" can't be trusted for an encyclopedia. This is why we get references for facts that "everybody" knows. What "everybody knows" is often somewhat wrong. Close enough for government work, but not for an encyclopedia. Student7 (talk) 17:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Distinguishing A-list and Z-List notables[edit]

As the introduction already implicitly recognises by naming only them, in its Notables section Samos has 3 top notables (who are the only reason why I have any interest in Samos), Aristarchus, Epicurus, and Pythagoras (it matters little whether these are 'really' A-Listers, rather than B-Listers or C-Listers) and lots of minor notables (it matters little whether these are 'really' Z-Listers, rather than Y-Listers or X-Listers). I've singled out the A-Listers by spelling out why they are famous, but I'm not sure whether this is the best way to proceed - I would prefer to explictly split them into major and minor notables, but I fear this division would be deemed subjective and a violation of WP:NPOV or WP:NOR or whatever. Anybody got any better ideas? Tlhslobus (talk) 02:03, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

North Aegean[edit]

One of the cats of this article is "Islands of the north Aegean". Exactly what places an island in North Aegean ? In the map this island seems to be in the southern part of the sea. I'll call the editor. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 17:06, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

The North Aegean is a political, administrative and tourist region which is also physically not part of the other geographical chains. It includes both Samos and Icaria in the middle-East of the Aegean Sea. See North Aegean islands and North Aegean. Bards (talk)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Samos. 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) 06:28, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Samos. 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) 15:14, 5 December 2017 (UTC)