FORUM WARNING [2] Division by zero (Line: 2933 of /srcsgcaop/boardclass.php)
History of Turkey = History of the Turks -
     
 
The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help

This subforum is for critical evaluation of Wikipedia articles. However, to reduce topic-bloat, please make note of exceptionally poor stubs, lists, and other less attention-worthy material in the Miscellaneous Grab Bag thread. Also, please be aware that agents of the Wikimedia Foundation might use your evaluations to improve the articles in question.

Useful Links: Featured Article CandidatesFeatured Article ReviewArticles for DeletionDeletion Review

> History of Turkey = History of the Turks, Deletion of Western Civilization
Emperor
post
Post #1


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,871
Joined:
Member No.: 2,042



Articles:

Turkey

History of Turkey

Once again we see the "NPOV" content controllers at work. In the Turkey article, this is all they have to say about 1500 or so years of Roman/Byzantine history:

QUOTE(Wikipedia)
Anatolia was subsequently divided into a number of small Hellenistic kingdoms (including Bithynia, Cappadocia, Pergamum, and Pontus), all of which had succumbed to the Roman Republic by the mid-1st century BC.[29]

In 324, the Roman emperor Constantine I chose Byzantium to be the new capital of the Roman Empire, renaming it New Rome (later Constantinople and Istanbul). After the fall of the Western Roman Empire, it became the capital of the Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman Empire).[30]


and then they go on to mention Manzikert and the fall of Constantinople very briefly.

They don't say anything about the Greek Orthodox church, which is headquartered in Turkey.

Well ok, maybe the "History of Turkey" article will have a little more detail? NOPE (IMG:smilys0b23ax56/default/nope.gif) it is literally the "The history of the Turks" according to Wikipedia.

In contrast check out the Spain article, which gives a relatively fair summary under the "Muslim Iberia" heading; or the Greece article, which at least acknowledges that part of their history.

It's kind of stupid... if I were Turkish I'd be pimping Byzantine history for all it is worth.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Replies
Somey
post
Post #2


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,816
Joined:
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(Emperor @ Thu 5th April 2012, 9:06pm) *
It's kind of stupid... if I were Turkish I'd be pimping Byzantine history for all it is worth.

No, you wouldn't, and it's for the same reason there's a separate article on the History of the Republic of Turkey (T-H-L-K-D) - the current government desperately wants to distance itself from the Armenian Genocide, which it regards (or wants to be regarded) as having been committed by a completely different regime. The Armenian diaspora all over the world has always wanted reparations, or even just an admission of guilt, from "Turkey" - but the current Turkish government insists it wasn't them, it was the Ottoman Sultanate who killed 1.5 million Armenians.

I wouldn't be surprised to find that the current arrangement of articles on this topic, as well as the concentration of info on ethnic Turks in the one article, is due primarily to edit-warring between Turks and Armenians that's been going on for years, with a series of "compromises" imposed by US/UK-based admins who probably know almost nothing about the situation beyond what pops up on Google.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post



Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now:
 
     
FORUM WARNING [2] Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home2/wikipede/public_html/int042kj398.php:242) (Line: 0 of Unknown)