History of Turkey = History of the Turks, Deletion of Western Civilization Options

[Emperor]

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:

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 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.

[Web Fred]

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:

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 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.

Come, come. Do you really have to pick out the obvious targets for the POV-pushers?

What's next Israeli and Palastine articles? Yugoslavian ones? Eurasian ones?

At least give us examples of subtle ones. They're the ones that are really harmful.

[Fusion]

It would just be necessary to add a few cross-references. Surely there are articles on the Byzantine Empire and the Greek Orthodox Church. Anyway, it is the Orthodox Church as it is found in many countries other than Greece. Please do not push a POV while complaining of other POV!

[Mister Die]

I suppose the issue here is of a Turkish entity rather than the land itself.

E.g. Great Soviet Encyclopedia begins the history of Turkey in the 14th century:

The Turkish state was formed in the 14th century on territory in Asia Minor that had belonged, either wholly or in part, to several ancient and medieval states. These states included the Hittite Empire, Lydia, Media, the Achaemenid Empire, the empire of Alexander the Great, the Se-leucid state, Pontus, Pergamum, Rome, Byzantium, and the Sultanate of Konya. By the 1320’s, a feudal principality had been formed in northwestern Asia Minor; it was called the Ottoman (Osman) Empire after Osman I, the founder of the ruling dynasty. The Turkish nationality that developed in this state from various Turkic tribes and elements of the indigenous population came to be called Ottoman Turks.

In the 1320’s and 1330’s the Turks conquered the remaining Anatolian possessions of Byzantium: Bursa (1326), which became the first capital of Turkey, Nicaea (iznik), and Nicomedia (izmit). From its inception the Ottoman Empire was a military-feudal state. The feudal warriors (spahsis) who made up the ruling class concentrated on the conquest and pillaging of new territories. The military-Le/w system of landholding (seeLEHN) that developed in the Ottoman Empire led to further Turkish conquests. Eastern Thrace, including Adrianople (Edirne), and several Bulgarian cities were conquered in the second half of the 14th century. In 1389 the victory of the Turks on Kosovo Polje transformed Serbia into a tributary. Turkish troops subjugated the Bulgarian Kingdom, Thessaly, and Macedonia. At the battle of Nicopolis in 1396, the Turks routed the united forces of the Crusaders and advanced to Constantinople. By the end of the 14th century, the Ottoman Empire had annexed, by peaceful means or military conquest, all the Anatolian principalities (bey-lics) as far as Canik (Samsun Vilayet) to the northeast, Silvas to the east, and Karaman to the southeast.

In the early 15th century a large army headed by Tamerlane invaded Anatolia. At the battle of Ankara in 1402, the sultan Baya-zid I (ruled 1389–1402) was defeated and taken prisoner, and most of Anatolia broke up into its former beylics.

In 1415 popular revolts against the feudal government broke out in western Anatolia and the Balkans. The Ottoman Empire was gradually restored after the revolts had been crushed and the internecine struggle of the sons of Bayazid I had ended. By the 1440’s the Ottoman Turks had resumed their expansion into the Balkans. The sultan Murad II (ruled 1421–51) routed in 1444 and 1448 the armies of the Crusaders who attempted to halt the Turkish advance; his son, Mehmed II (ruled 1451–81), took Constantinople on May 29,1453, after a siege lasting nearly two months. The Byzantine Empire ceased to exist, and Constantinople (Istanbul) became the capital of the Ottoman Empire.

Whereas they have a large article on the Byzantine Empire.

[Emperor]

I suppose the issue here is of a Turkish entity rather than the land itself.

well yes, but most every other country article in Wikipedia gives the history of the land, not the predominant nation-state ethnicity that happens to be in charge at the moment. Almost 1 in 5 Turkish citizens is a Kurd, but "History of Turkey" doesn't mention the word "Kurd" even once.

[Somey]

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.