Talk:Bitlis

message: I added some material describing the old houses as old Armenian Houses, per the architectural style, and inhabitants in early 20th century, why was it deleted?
:There wasn't any source for it (though I do know it is true), and it seemed out of place the way it was written, so I removed it when I added more info about the old houses. There are far more surviving old Muslim houses than old Armenian ones - so what was the point of mentioning it? Are you implying that there is a difference in the styles of Bitlis's houses when built by Muslims or Christians? If a source was found which said there was, then maybe there would be a place for the info. Meowy 15:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old Armenian Houses 

message: Also, I am wondering, do the western sources discriminate between the Zaza, Turks, Kurds, when talking about "Turks killing the Armenians". Especially, I have the distinct impression that the roles Kurds played w.r.t. Armenians in Bitlis is often understated, considering the city of Bitlis itself has such little Turkish population. What do you think?
Denizkural (talk) 07:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Those sort of short wartime news reports probably won't distinguish between them because they are simplified and written for a general audience, and Britain/France/Russia was at war with Turkey, not Kurdistan. I think the true scale of Kurdish involvement in the Armenian Genocide won't be investigated until Turkey itself begins to admit that the events took place. As it is now, nobody has any incentive to investigate the exact truth. Kurds curently like to portray themselves in Europe as powerless eternal victims. Armenians seem to look on Kurds with an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" attitude, so don't want to dwell too much on the Kurdish participation in the Genocide. Once the genocide is recognised by Turkey, then Turks themselves will want to reveal that Turkish civilians did not have as big an involvement with the actual killing as one might assume: a lot of it was done by non-Turks, especially Kurds. Meowy 15:58, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Role of Kurds? 

message: Can you please show the link to New York times for where you got the paragraph? Because I couldn't find it, we need accurate references to do things. --HyeTashnak (talk) 13:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hudavendigar 

message: This article, like many others, have been turned into a an Armenian propaganda piece.  It is hard for a casual reader to realize that this is actually  Turkish city, with a thousand year Seljuk-Ottoman-Turkish history.  Mostly  Armenian history and heritage has been included and all attempts to balance it have been thwarted by POV editors.  Various discussions above attest to this.  In addition, the tag idenfying the disputed nature of the article have been blatantly removed, though a statement that clearly forbids such removal without a resolution is part of the tag removed.--Murat (talk) 02:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I request that you provide a more detailed explanation with specific excerpts of the text that demonstrate the onesidedness of this article. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 02:26, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless I see proper reasons for the insertion of a POV tag to the article, I will continue to remove it. Murat has been spamming this tag over multiple articles and has been inserting identical "Disputed Objectivity" sections in their talk pages, all containing identical text (see  and  - they contain the same text that is posted here). Given that the "Disputed Objectivity" text placed here is off-topic (Bitlis does not have a "thousand year Seljuk-Ottoman-Turkish history" and the article contains almost nothing about Armenian history and heritage), and it has been reproduced unchanged in multiple talk pages (making it impossible to know which article he is actually referring to), the insertion of the POV tag did not follow Wikipedia guidelines on POV tag placement and it should be removed. Meowy 03:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

text: As you see it, what counter-statements would balance the POV, Murat? LeadSongDog (talk) 17:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Murat hasn't even bothered to explain what he alleges to be POV material. His comment below the Disputed Objectivity subheading amounts too nothing more than an I-don't-like-it rant. If he has content relating to that "thousand year Seljuk-Ottoman-Turkish history" claim, then why does he not just put it into the article? His "mostly  Armenian history and heritage has been included" claim is laughable considering only two sentences in the whole article mention Armenians - those sentences being "Until 1915 there were five Armenian monasteries and several churches in Bitlis" and "One third of the population of Bitlis was ethnic Armenian prior to the Armenian Genocide. In 1915, Turks and Kurds, led by Jevdet Bey Pasha, massacred some 15,000 Armenians in Bitlis". Both sentences have accompanying references. Meowy 18:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

text: Your understanding of the history of Bitlis seems very limited. If you have a date and a reference for the capture of the town by the Seljuk Turks then put it in the article. Everything else you have said shows both your lack of knowledge and your POV warring to include extremist, marginal opinions as if they were accepted mainsteam opinions. BTW, I have just added a lot more about the town's medieval history. Meowy 02:51, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed Objectivity 

message: Someone is under the impression that Sheref is the "modern" version of "Şeref". Şeref is and was how it was written 500 yrs ago, except in Arabic script (which does have a "Ş" I am told) rather than Latin alphabet.  In either case, it was never spelled "Sheref" in any script at any time, except in bad translations.--Murat (talk) 03:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ش = ş = sh. This is not really worth arguing about. Aramgar (talk) 03:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

text: I'm also doubtful about the correctness of using modern-Turkish spelling for historical places. The Mush and Hinis mentioned in this article are not the same as the modern towns of Muş and Hınıs - in the article we are talking about emirates that no longer exist. Meowy 18:08, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It has been almost a year since I made the above point, and nobody has objected to it, so I have changed the names to Moush and Hinis, but kept their wikilinks to the modern towns. The "Ahlat" spelling is also not correct, but books seem to use various spellings for the medieval emirate. Meowy 02:50, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sheref vs Şeref 

message: It is a mystery how people even come with these so-called historic names.  Was there ever an official map with this made-up name(s)?  Has anyone actuallyh called the place by this name?  Any international documents?  Not likley.  It was an Ottoman, Selcuk, Roman and Greek city all through history.  These forced namings seem to be driven solely by nationlaistic agendas and emotions.  It is getting rather silly.  I will not accept it.  It is just one more point to create nationalistic quarrels around.  Seems like some have taken this as a sport.  If there are such ancient names that may be of any interest to public in general, any value at all, then it should be presented in the history section.--Murat (talk) 04:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "It was an Ottoman, Selcuk, Roman and Greek city all through history" - if that is the extent of your understanding, leave this article alone. Meowy 19:42, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I repeat, these seem to be rather made up names in made up languages, of no or little significance, known to no one, and never printed or put on an official map.  If there is back up then it should be produced.  First sentence of the first paragraph of the article is not the place for such dubious trivia.--Murat (talk) 17:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm still trying to understand if you're joking. The first references to Baghesh/Bitlis in Armenian literature was in the seventh century works of Sebeos and Anania Shirakatsi, and even before then the city served as at an important strategic point for the ancient Kingdom of Armenia. The cities of Anatolia and Armenia long existed before the coming of the Seljuk Turks, which is unfortunately, but not unsurprisingly, something they still do not teach to children  in the Republic of Turkey. Quit acting as if the article has no reliable sources and if you still want to argue otherwise, take Meowy's advice, "if that is the extent of your understanding, leave this article alone".--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 17:53, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historic Non-names 

message: Bitlis = Badlis : these two towns are one, there should be only one  article, --Hope&Act3! (talk) 20:55, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bitlis = Badlis 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bitlis. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430154407/http://dmi.gov.tr/veridegerlendirme/il-ve-ilceler-istatistik.aspx?m=BITLIS to http://www.dmi.gov.tr/veridegerlendirme/il-ve-ilceler-istatistik.aspx?m=BITLIS
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080914144150/http://www.bitlisnews.com:80/ to http://www.bitlisnews.com
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:29, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The records all being from 2010-forward suggest that the problem with Istanbul's climate normals is unfortunately also present here, so I'll look around to see how common this is. I don't know if the new normals are actually all that different here, as Bitlis is a rather small city. I haven't reverted them, but perhaps we should. Uness232 (talk) 08:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issue with the new 1991-2020 normals