Jump to content

Talk:Special Organization (Ottoman Empire)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Teşkilat-i Mahsusa)

Comments

[edit]

Please refrain from removing mention of the Armenian genocide in this article. This organization's direct role has been widely documented. And no, the Armenian genocide is not "alleged". - Fedayee (talk) 21:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unbelievable, in which universe you guys live?! You're telling people Ottoman Seals had been used to commit a genocide.Wake up! 21:30, 23 April 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chonanh (talk • contribs)

Special Organization

[edit]

This article should replace the article Special Organization (Ottoman Empire) since they are both about the same thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.233.20.131 (talk) 06:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where does your citation for this claim? I would like to take a closer look at that source. The article "Special" claims executive committee of "Ministry of the Interior" (Talaat Pasha). The "Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa" article claims organized under War Department (Enver Pasha). They seem to be two different organizations. --Seemsclose (talk) 22:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Before I give a source, let me say that even if there were two separate organizations, the presentation is inconsistent. Teşkilât-ı Mahsûsa means "Special Organization", so why is an article about one group given an English name and another a Turkish name? And why would they even found two organizations with the same name? What I think has happened is the political wing and the military wing of the same organization have been given two separate articles. I guess you could justify that, but the names and articles should make that clear. You can check out Erik Jan Zürcher's well-respected "Turkey: a Modern History" for info on it (109-110). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.233.177.40 (talk) 04:36, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I meant to add that the current state makes it quite difficult to find information. The name, Teşiklât-ı Mahsûsa is used as frequently as Special Organization in history books, so people looking for information are likely to be mislead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.233.177.40 (talk) 04:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
How do we know your claim is verified, where is the citation specifically states these people belong to teskilat-i muhsasa? The existence of Teskilat-i Muhsasa ("Turkey: a Modern History") is not denied. But this article claims there is a genocidal civilian group who killed civilian Armenians. They planned raids on children. I'm asking the proof for these people belong to teskilat-i muhsasa. Can you prove beyond any doubt that either "they did not existed" or "belong to teskilat-i muhsasa." Did yo read the Wikipedia:Verifiability. You do not even use your own name or e-mail. How can we trust to you? --Seemsclose (talk) 04:46, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't turn this into a genocide discussion. I'm not trying to deny it or any of the information in either of the two articles. I've tried to explain to you that the spelling "Teskilati mahsusa" is incorrect. Check any dictionary. Secondly, read my information above about the confusion with respect to using English names in one case and Turkish in the other. Finally, there is no requirement to have an account on Wikipedia. It doesn't give you any more legitimacy than me (where's your name and email address, by the way?). 88.233.177.40 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 05:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The obvious solution is to merge the two articles under a single title (your choice: "Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa" or "Special Organization"). And by the way, the fact that you are reverting the name change from "Teskilati Mahsusa" to "Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa" is really quite remarkable considering the fact that the source already cited (Stoddard) uses the correct spelling which you reject, claiming that I need "1 author 2 book 3 page number". Please take a deep breath and understand what I am trying to do. Don't panic. This has nothing to do with denial. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.233.177.40 (talk) 05:31, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do not become personal!!! There is no place to your untested beliefs. If you believe your opinion is correct, the solution is with the Wikipedia:Verifiability. Take some time from your life, and summarize the organizational structure of these criminals according to your source. If you do that, I will believe to you. I will bring my own sources and see what is going on. Be open about the period. Tell us what your citation says, page by page. I will buy that book and verify if your summary matches. The solution lies in the path to be more open. Not I said so.. type of arguments. The citation is the route for civilization in this conflict. BE WP:CIVIL. --Seemsclose (talk) 20:39, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resources for expansion

[edit]

There is a ten-part series of articles in Turkish here. Feel free to delete this message once you have cited the articles. --Adoniscik(t, c) 00:24, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sad shape

[edit]

I do not know if it is the edit warring or just laziness, but this oddity can not be called an article in any shape or form. What is Susurluk got to do with this? Faithful to three pashas? Can we get real? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.248.90 (talk) 13:04, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, where we write articles by summarizing reliable sources. If you are aware of any discrepancies between the sourced articles and their summaries here, or if the sources are themselves unreliable, please notify us or correct it yourself. You should never write anything, esp. on sensitive subjects, without citing reliable sources. --Adoniscik(t, c) 16:08, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:05, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Teşkîlât-ı Mahsûsa → Special Organization (Ottoman Empire) – per WP:COMMONNAME & WP:USEENGLISH

List of members of the Teşkilât-ı Mahsûsa → List of members of the Special Organization (Ottoman Empire) or List of members of the Special Organization of the Ottoman Empire

Takabeg (talk) 06:43, 6 July 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Categorization

[edit]

Categories that are not referenced in the article are removed. They can be re-added if references with reliable source are inserted. ¨¨¨¨— Preceding unsigned comment added by CeeGee (talk • contribs)

 Done Takabeg (talk) 09:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Date of establishment

[edit]

The date of establishment of this organization is unclear. For example Tevfik Bıyıkoğlu claimed "August 5, 1914". Fuat Balkan shew another date. I'll add information about this despute. Takabeg (talk) 09:36, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Özel Teşkilat ?

[edit]

According to google books, Enver-Paşa + "Özel Teşkilat" (all languages) - 0 result. -- Takabeg (talk) 03:36, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid it's misleading to state that Teşkilât-ı Mahsusa is in Modern Turkish. I agree with your decision to remove the label "Turkish" from the article. - Ohsnapitsdoruk —Preceding undated comment added 03:47, 24 August 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Don't be afraid. Teşkilât-ı Mahsusa is used in the modern Turkish historiography ("Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa" -Llc 227 results). -- Takabeg (talk) 03:55, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Civinis Effendi"

[edit]

I was reading the article and I noticed that in Activities it says that Civinis Effendi was a major player in the creation of the organization in 1913 and then goes on to say that he worked for Catherine the Great who died in 1796. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.6.141.179 (talk) 20:46, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Special Organization (Ottoman Empire). 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 11:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 11 January 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: No consensus. No consensus around disambiguation style and triggers; relisted with no input for over a week. User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 14:16, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Special Organization (Ottoman Empire) → Special Organization – This topic gets around 90% of the total pageviews of all "Special Organization" topics. Therefore, I would consider it the primary topic. Virtually all results at Google Scholar in the first few pages either refer to this organization or use the phrase "special organization" in a generic sense. Since the only other topic is Special Organization (Algeria), I am calling on the dab to be deleted per WP:TWODABS. (t · c) buidhe 15:39, 11 January 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. Jack Frost (talk) 08:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • pageviews, Google Scholar (t · c) buidhe 15:39, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Far too common a phrase not to be disambiguated, especially since it is not a particularly well-known organisation. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Disambiguation is only for pages that have a Wikipedia article. The generic phrase "special organization" is just two words put together and will never have an encyclopedia article or even a wiktionary entry since it is not even idiomatic. (t · c) buidhe 15:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Like Necrothesp, I'm a rather strong proponent of "preemptively" disambiguating generic names such as this one to improve recognizability. However, this time I agree with the nom that it appears to be the only notable "Special Organization" in the universe (apart from the much less known Algerian one), and it's very unlikely we will reuse this name for anything else of encyclopedic value. No such user (talk) 13:13, 28 January 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Special_Organization_(Ottoman_Empire)&oldid=1208423522"