Talk:Armenian genocide/Archive 12

message: Further information: Denial of Armenian genocide points to Historical revisionism, I think this is only true if you believe that the armenian genecide occured (POV).  I think the link should be removed.
Mdozturk 23:46, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's where the issue is covered in context. Its presence there appears to be uncontroversial, given that the section was added to the Negationism article almost six months ago. If you want to remove it, edit the Historical revisionism (negationism) article. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 22:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Denial = Historical revisionism? 

message: :Moved to subpage. - FrancisTyers · 14:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sadly the key issue is never addressed 

message: :Moved to subpage. - FrancisTyers · 14:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opinion 

message: The material referring to Halacoglu in the Turkish Position/Casualties which relied on TV interviews, and wasn't in English as she is spoke or writ, has been removed. There's no reason why Halacoglu's writings on the subject (in particular the two works in English) shouldn't be mentioned, but not second hand, only if supported by citations from the works in question. WP:CS refers. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 19:42, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adieu (or Au revoir ?) Halacoglu 

message: :Moved to subpage. - FrancisTyers · 14:17, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenian killed pregnant womans! 

message: :Moved to subpage. - FrancisTyers · 14:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  THOTH style 

message: :Moved to subpage. - FrancisTyers · 14:21, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  THOTH style meets its match - not quite... 

message: :Moved to subpage. - FrancisTyers · 14:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berktay - Armenians killed by a Special organization 

message: your changes to the article without an explanation and a signature is generaly automaticly reverted by other users since this is regarded as vandalism and your acts proves basis for the protection of the article. Please stop that and use legit. means. neurobio 11:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  To all anon users 

message: can someone describe me what they see in the first picture? where does it come from? who are these soldiers?neurobio 14:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  first picture 

message: Plain and simple, it is not a famous picture, it is of questionable provenence as what it really is. I will find a replacement for it. Fad (ix) 18:34, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, getting the enemy naked and dressing its uniform was common practice. Or else, there is no reason to undress the enemy. As for circumcision, not a good indicator, Armenians were too. You could ask Syrian and Lebanese Armenians, you will find many who are circumcised, and they are not in the Ottoman Empire anymore. I already know which picture will replace it. This one, , and there is another picture which I will request its undeletion. This , a mass burning cite in Mus, we sourced it. , but Coolcat was effectivally able to get it deleted since he did not remove the tag while I was away. Fad (ix) 21:25, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

text: We sourced it, I was referring to the discussion I and Cansin had. Don't assume things. As for the dress, actually, clots and dress parts could survive during a human cumbustion, as amazing as it might appear. Actually the picture shows about what we might expect. If you really want to know how so, I'll refer you to forensic science. Fad (ix) 21:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have removed the first picture 

message: I'm unprotecting because nothing seems to be going on on the talk page here in the past week, and it's been protected for ages. --Tony Sidaway 04:02, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unprotecting 

message: This site has cleary been hijacked by the usual suspects of Armenian nationalists and their sympethizers, it is turning into a plain and simple propaganda site and therefore losing all its credibility! lutherian 05:49, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My my, and the anon users who always add racist websites without any explanations for their edits and arrive by the dozen are always acting in good faith...Sounds alot like the teapot calling the kettle.--MarshallBagramyan 06:27, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  there have been anon users from both sides of the debate, but bombarding the site with photos (this is not an exhibit or a museum mind you) and changing key words such as support and opposition to recognition and denial as clevelander and others have frequently done gives a very tainted impression to this debate. As I said earlier, this is NOT the Jewish Holocust which is well documented and proven beyond any reasonble doubt and recognized by every single country with the exception of a couple of rogue states. If you dont want this topic to resemble a circus, then stop hijacking it with propaganda material. lutherian 10:10, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, stop being so hysterical, Lutherian. I don't see what's wrong with the pictures. I also don't see what's wrong with having translated terms at the start. John Smith's 13:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  you also dont see anything wrong with changing what are considered key terms, heck why dont just remove all the content that rejects the genocide thesis and like that we can have a pure propaganda site which I know would delight your armenian buddies! lutherian 13:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You need to calm down. For one thing I don't have any "Armenian buddies" - stop making childish statements against people just because they disagree with you. John Smith's 14:04, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  please answer only if you have something constructive to say and stop evading the issue, you are clearly extremely biased on this topic and probably inherited the mindset of your english ancestors so obsessed with getting rid of the sick man of Europe. lutherian 16:31, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please stop your trolling and name-calling Lutherian. Your denialist point of view is already presented in the article, and is actually given undue weight. I believe it is about time that we consider removing some of the extreme Turkish denialist point of views from the central parts of the article such as the intro, in order to avoid giving undue weight to these minority POV's. -- Karl Meier 22:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  we are not discussing the world according to Karl Meier and his extreme shortsightedness so if you have something of value to contribute then concentrate on that instead of trying to just slander the opposite view! lutherian 05:31, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am simply pointing out that the denialists POV is given undue weight in this article, and I mention that we should adjust it according to WP:NPOV#Undue_weight. Unlike your trolling and personal attacks, that is very relevant. -- Karl Meier 06:18, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I entirely agree - the denilaist position is given more then undue weight in this article - to the point of embarrasment. The "Turkish position" as presented in this article is merely a list of unsupported (and largely already discredited) suppositions. They have no place in this article taking up the amount of space that they do when the article is lacking in presenting a tremendous amount of substantsiated material that documents the acts of genocide against the Armenians (check out the detail presented in the Holocaust article for instance). The Armenian Genocide article demands precisely this level of detail if not more - if only because its denial is so prevelant. And denialist trolls such as Lutherian should not be tolerated. Their aim is stricly to disrupt the process of portraying the truth and create confusion - and we are letting it suceed at this reprehensible task. shame. --THOTH 14:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

text:  even in your choice of words your frame of mind, more specifically your biased views on the subject matter come out, you call the opposite view denialist, this is not the Jewish Holocaust mind you and no matter how hard you try you will never succeed in making it so because there is a notion called the truth and this topic seems to be lacking that very essential notion thanks to the likes of yourself! But whine all you want, your contributions will always go to waste because of your flawed manner of distinguishing fact from fiction lutherian 08:19, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some who deny that the killings commited by Turkey was a case of genocide, and there is nothing wrong with calling them "denialists". It is very accurate. Another thing is that there seems to be a lot of "new" IP-address editors appearing in articles where other editors are opposing your editing, supporting you with reverts. Lutherian, are you using these IP accounts as sockpuppets to win your revert-wars? -- Karl Meier 08:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  pls dont try to change the subject by accusing me of sockpuppetting, vandalism and what not. Funny how because I support the opposite view, I have been accused of all kinds of absurd things. There are very well respected scholars, dignitaries, politiciens, individuals etc that reject the genocide claims so if you want to make a fool out of yourself and call the US of A a denialist nation, then pls be my guest. Its plain to me from reading your contributions that not only do you have a fundamental hatred for Turks but you seem to be islamophobic which clearly puts you in the ranks of known racists such as Eupator lutherian 08:42, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I am not going to accept your trolling and namecalling Lutherian. I will not respond to messages unless you give up your name-calling, and I'll file a personal attack report regarding your behavior here. -- Karl Meier 08:46, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  sockpuppeting is a serious accusation and since I know that I was not involved in any of that I will be filing a complaint against you for your defamatory remarks lutherian 09:11, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That would be interesting. -- Karl Meier 09:12, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

text: "The Armenian Genocide is proven in all its components - among them intent. The converging evidence is well in excess of that generally judged abundant in establishing other historical truths. The genocide was a horrendous crime. The evidence is there - province by province, city by city, village by village, hamlet by hanlet, with its countless variations according to time and place yet all the same in the vast process of extermination - genocide. A deliberate plan, carefully organized and brutally executed. The deniers and rationalizers offend the dignity of the historian and of all humanity." Yves Ternon - author of several volumes concerning human rights and genocide in - Freedom and Responsibility of the Historian - the "Lewis Affair" - 1999 --THOTH 14:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  yes we have heard it countless of times especially the part where Turks are superhumans, incredibly well organized and infinately evil making even the Nazis seem like nice guys in comparison. But more importantly, you are back, I was worried about you, I kind of missed all those endless cut and pastes, its been lonely out here!!! lutherian 18:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Blah blah blah...--THOTH 02:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  hijacking 

message: Dear newcomer. I am a senior relative to you but relative to the other guys here, I am still a newcomer to this article. First of all, in this article, there is no Neutral Point of View policy, nor a valid  accurate perspective. The people who "support" some aspects of this article, which has always been questionable - I do not say certain or vice versa -are the ones who control the page and unfortunately they are more than the people who support the opposite questionable parts. We once had something going on in this talk page, and before a consensus was achieved nobody would attack and spam the article. Any knowledgeable person will certainly find this article biased not only because the editors are one-sided, but also the article has a strong shift to their idea. You can for example check the online Brytannica- a real encyclopedia- which was edited by experts in the field, and you will see something very different. Do not waste your time here, because you will be immediately identified as a vandal, if you are to change for example the biased parts, such as references, and etc... Unfortunately, evertything according to these people showing the  other side of the problem neutrally is problem. They cannot acccept that. 
Okay in Wiki, if you are a POV pusher, you will be exposed by the other neutral editors on an article. But what if there are 15-20 people who constantly bias the article ? And what if whenever you revert, you become a vandal? What if you are using an anon account (even with a static ip ) and that is not effectively allowed in this page?( They think that anon users are by definition vandals.) No, there is no way out of this. What they seek is to post what they think. Not to introduce the whole problem. There are lots of extreme lines in the article-some of them are very silly details though - (like "he claims ... is converted to it is claimed"), but the other side's supporters are too tired to fight with these groups, since they don't have enough time, or they are fed up. 
And what makes it even worse is that, imagine that you have a certain discussion and the most authorized person has nothing to do with it. All the admins who take care of this article , as far as I've seen, may not even know where Armenia is. They have some rules you have to attend and that is it. Never imagine that they make their own research and make decisions. They are using their Wikipedia Intuitions :) Of course you can't run a hospital if the man in charge is not even a nurse. That is the main problem. And what happened lately is that the guys who supported a single thought biased the article even more with unreferenced pictures, with irrelevant pictures, with photos that are agreed to be removed from the article etc..., and after they screamed and said the page was being vandalized (!) by anon users!!! And they called an admin and he locked the page. So, the admin did not even bother to check ,why the edit wars started in the first place! Their assumption is that if majority tells something is that way, it is true. What a shame, whan an apathy, what a sad situation. But it is not our problem since even 12 year olds can smell the bias in the air, and they are only making Wiki a worse place. I suggest you read a respectable encyclopedia if you want to see ASALA and other aspects of the problem. However, probably you will not see the metal band you are referring, not only because they are young, but also they are not the first and the last people to act like that.
IT is very sad that ASALA is not mentioned here. But as I said : You have nothing to do. 
So let them make it look like Armeniapedia which is another very very biased source. It is also in the references
--128.211.201.37 22:40, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, thanks for your feedback, from what I understand you are questioning the neutrality of this article, examples would help, because from what I understand you criticise the pictures and the lack of information on ASALA but neither of those have directly to do with the text. For the pictures, I can not tell what really is the problem since I am not following recently what is happening in the mainspace, so I don't really know which pictures in particular have been added and removed or which ones are not recieving concesus. For ASALA, I can answer, there is an article on Wikipedia on ASALA. Personaly, I don't see how in an article covering what happened in the 1910s reference to events in 1970s and 1980s is relevent. Regards--Fad (ix) 23:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  THE REASON WHY WE DON'T SEE ASALA IN THIS PAGE 

message: The evidence...from German, Austrian and Turkish sources in my view leads inescapably to the conclusion that the extermination of the Armenians was actually planned by a clique within the Young Turk leadership and executed by the sinister Special Organization ("Teshkilati Mahsusa") of the army. - Dominic Lieven - Empire - Yale University Press, 2001
In fact most of the available evidence points to the conclusion that a systematic decimation of the Armenian population in the eastern provinces had already been decided on by the Ittihad ve Terakki regime, and that the troubles in Van and elsewhere merely served as a convenient excuse for getting a program of mass deportations and large-scale extermination. - Ulrich Trumpener, (Historian) - Germany and the Ottoman Empire. Princeton, 1968
In the Spring of 1915...the government in Constantinople began work on the systematic annihilation of Armenians - Hilmar Kaiser - PHD - European Institute, Florence - Historian (Ottoman social and economic history) and Armenian Genocide resercher - from an interview with Dirk van Delft - NRC Handelsblad Page 51 - Amsterdam - May 27, 2000 
Yes, it was genocide - Halil Berktay - The Specter of the Armenian Genocide - An Interview with Halil Bektay - by Katchig Mouradian - November 1 2005 
It is clear that the Ittihadist faction that took control of the Ottoman Empire in 1912 was the organizer of the Armenian genocide in 1915. The First World War presented the ruling triumvirate with an opportunity, as Djemal Pasha put it, to “free ourselves through the world war from all conventions which meant so many attacks on our independence.” He went on to say that “ We had determined on radical reform….” ...“radical reform” was to eliminate the Armenian problem by eliminating the Armenians. That that was their plan was confirmed at the time by Lord Bryce and Arnold Toynbee, Ambassador Morgenthau, and German officials who were there as allies of the Ottoman government. - Helen Fein - Director of the Institute for the Study of Genocide and an Associate of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University - Looking Backward: The Armenian Genocide, the Holocaust, And Responses to Genocide Yesterday and Today - given at the Symposium on Genocide - 20th Century Genocide: Memory, Denial and Accountability, April 7, 2000 
The first implementation of the CUP regime’s goal of creating a homogeneous nation was the elimination of the Armenians from Anatolia in 1915 - Ayla Gul - Imagining the Turkish nation through ‘othering’ Armenians - in Nations and Nationalism 11 (1), 2005
...the fact that what happened in 1915 was a mass murder was not even the subject of an argument in any manner from the viewpoint of the actors of that period, with Mustafa Kemal at their head. - Taner Akcam - Historian and sociologist - The Genocide of Armenians and the silence of the Turks 
The Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust were the quintessential instances of genocide in the modern era. - Professor Robert Melson - Holocaust survivor and genocide scholar in Revolution and Genocide: On the Origins of the Armenian Genocide and the Holocaust - University of Chicago Press 1992 --THOTH 02:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: False premises and begging the question, I am impressed. Angus McLellan  (Talk) 10:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, you're right, come to think of it. Takhisis 07:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yes - let historians decide 

message:  needs to be changed to 
 please per TfD To Orphan. If an admin could do this please, thank you. --MECU≈talk 13:57, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done.--Commander Keane 18:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change <nowiki>{{main articles}} to {{main}}</nowiki> 

message: Can an admin please fix the  template to properly use  as I am trying to clean up all the references to that obsolete template. Thanx. Please reply on my talk page if there's a reason you don't want to, I am not watching this page. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 12:33, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As per the above section, done.--Commander Keane 18:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead template 

message: The section entitled "The position of the international community" lists many countries and international bodies as "officially recognizing the Armenian genocide", but gives hardly any citations. --LambiamTalk 19:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Position of the international community: citations needed 

message: This website why removes at external links? I want answer.--Tall Armenian Tale 22:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tall Armenian Tale 

message: Section: Process and camps of deportation. Last sentencte: "In any event, the foreseeable consequences of the government's decision to move the Armenians led to a significant number of deaths." It think the correct way to say this is: "In any event, the foreseeable consequence of the government's decision to move the Armenians was a significant number of deaths." Pukkie 06:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Just zis Guy you know? 10:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Textual small improvement, should be non-controversial 

message: Can somebody add that in Turkey there is not any Armenian village: afer thousand and thousand years of presences, nowsaday in Turkey there is no Armenian village--Alsace38 (talk) 12:59, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. This, I think, is what the above proposed paragraph of "Patriocide", as I conventionally refered to, should include. So let us concentrate the efforts to "build it up". Aregakn (talk) 23:41, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There is unfortunately only one insignificant ethnic Armenian village left in Turkey, it is called Vakifli.--Davo88 (talk) 03:06, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Turkification" and/or "Kurdification" of those kind of villages is an other issue we could or should discuss and present in the "Patriocide" section. Aregakn (talk) 17:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

text: Yes, you may have a POV as well. Of course, this article is about the Armenian Genoide and it contains the fact of forceful deportations after division (and murder) of most of men from the rest of the population and the facts of massacres on their way. What you say is mentioned in the article already. Thank you for bringing it up again, but no need to repeat oneself. Aregakn (talk) 21:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

text: Well all Turkey says that there wasn't any genocide, but when you see that only "1" village is present in Turkey, that means we have loste thousand and thousand villages: what did they become?
If we say no genocide? so where are all armenian heritage, that's mean there was an "ETHNIC CLEANING OF ARMENIANS"!--Alsace38 (talk) 12:10, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Guys, rhetorics isn't useful in Wikipedia, usually. I'd like to ask and suggest you all concentrating on contributions to the articles of knowlegde. As this topic is directly what a loss of motherland is ("Patriocide"), I'd like to urge you all to participate in the discussion of how to add to the value of it. Thanks Aregakn (talk) 21:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  There isn't any ARMENIAN town city or village in Turkey 

message: I removed the following information: The Jewish community in Constantinople hid many Armenians in their homes during the riots and the local synagogue was therefore attacked by Muslims on Yom Kipur in September the same yearhttp://www.jpress.org.il/Repository/getFiles.asp?Style=OliveXLib:LowLevelEntityToSaveGifMSIE_TAUHE&Type=text/html&Locale=hebrew-skin-custom&Path=HMZ/1896/09/25&ChunkNum=-1&ID=Ar00201&PageLabel=2 | Article from Jewish newspaper Ha-Melitz, 25/09/1896. with the comment: "Although the fact is interesting, it is quite anecdotical in such a general article where only the main facts should be presented. It is enough to mentıon it on Hamidian Massacres".  revert me, and then added a comment on my discussion page : You are welcome to participate in the discussions of the Armenian Genocide article. But before reverting an edit claiming that it is unneeded, pls discuss it. And I am sorry but an other claim of yours that the info is on Hamidian massacres page is not true. First of all, I would like to make clear that I didn't said that the fact was on the page Hamidian Massacres but that it was enough to mention it there. This stated, I would like to reach an agreement regarding this quotation. Such a general article should only mention very general facts and not unecessary details. Here the subject is not the Hamidian massacres but the Armenian genocide. Therefore, the account of this massacre should be kept as simple as possible. My proposition is the following : 1)add the information into the article Hamidian massacres. 2) Remove it from this article.--Kimdime (talk) 11:05, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. The nature of the article is too general and too oriented toward the Ottoman Empire's internal conditions and intl. politics to focus on another community's very specific actions during a single event. Something like that may be appropriate in the lower section of the article, detailing the reaction of the non-Armenian communities during the genocide, but not in the general lead-up of the article.--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 16:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. But first of all, deleting information with summary "It is enough to mentıon it on" when this is not mentioned there and neither did you change it's location, is simply deleting relevant information. It simply means "I'll delete, you do with it whatever". Secondly, I tried to let you know simply deleting/blanking isn't the propper way. Calling that info's presense on this article "anecdotical" is also irrelevant, though it can show why you didn't add it to Hammidian's. Thank you for copying messages to invite to discussions to discussion pages. It is very relevant. Aregakn (talk) 17:09, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ALl I want to say is that blanking in this manner is unacceptable. The rest I leave to others to decide as I hate clicking 100 articles (and forgetting where I was before) to know the whole story about 1 thing even if people think it's practical. IsmailAhmedov (talk) 03:28, 22 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information about the jewish community