Talk:Şebinkarahisar

message: == Şebinkarahisar ==
*Şebinkarahisar is a district of Giresun Province, Turkey. tr.wikipedia.org Şebinkarahisar —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.224.206.214 (talk) 15:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: True. Khoikhoi 02:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur.--Doktor Gonzo 16:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

text: The vomit and advertisement of Armenian heroism is not nice either. No one meant to put that in the intro if you wanna call that one-liner an intro anyway. You could've, w/out vomiting, asked it to be moved to a section and less POV. You didn't need to remove the entire paragraph either. - Fedayee 17:01, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just pointed out what should be edited, wasn't interested in doing it myself. And I was just being honest with my previous comment, but at least I kept it on the discussion page. Anyway, see you around Fedayee.--Doktor Gonzo 17:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is still in its infancy. If you want to read a vomit-inducing article, read this one. Happy editing, Hakob 00:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is our second encounter and the second time you are making a comparison to an irrelevant article that you think concerns me because of my nationality.--Doktor Gonzo 11:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There will probably be more in the future since decorum seems to be an alien idea to you. Hakob 01:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NPA and WP:POINT. I was actually warning you.--Doktor Gonzo 10:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Take it easy guys.. Baristarim 02:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Okay, first you tell me to create a sub-section and now you are against the sub-section...right. What's so bad about the sub-section anyway? And I will be removing the NPOV tag because it is just a bad faith tag there just because it talks about the Armenian Genocide. I have changed the wording to be as NPOV as possible...cmon be reasonable here. - Fedayee 21:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I asked you to create an appropriate section, don't you think in the context of this article, an article about a city, History is more suited than Armenian Genocide? And I still have problems with your writing, it depicts the event as if Şebin Karahisar was a sovereign Armenian city resisting against an Ottoman invasion. And you don't move the NPOV tag until the discussions have been resolved, that's the whole idea of it.--Doktor Gonzo 09:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Plus I think one sentence about the event is more than enough, it already has an article of its own, the internal-link directs. I summarized its 2500 year old history in just one paragpraph and you are sparing another paragraph just for one event that already has its own article, would you call that balanced?--Doktor Gonzo 10:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah but dude the Armenian Genocide was not a section, it was a sub-section in the History section itself. Also, the summarizing of the history section is not the final version...the article is still a stub and in the moment this article expands, the entire history section must expand too. And come on now, the small paragraph on the AG is a mere 3.5 lines. There is no big detail in it. How it started, by who, against who and what was the result. It's basic coverage of the event. I hope your minor edit took care of the problem that it depicted it as an invasion. Cheers. - Fedayee 16:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The "resistance" as you call it, started as a result of Armenian-Russian alliance, Armenian uprising, and the consequent Russian invasion, all of which developed over a period of decades. Ottoman forces were responding to the Russian invasion of Trabzon and the Armenian land grabs. Trabzon evetually fell briefly and Giresun (actually this town was part of Sivas at the time). I think that's called civil war, is it not? Unless there's expicit evidence that says people were kiled no reason but their ethinicity, I think the we can change this to a civil war and a WW1 battle between the Ottomans and the Armenians. --Oguz1 15:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

text: You're not making sense here. The Armenian Genocide could be used as time period. If you want wiki-proof, visit the Holocaust page and ctrl+f "during the Holocaust" and see how many they can be used. I will be adding 1915 next to during the AG as well. All the references state that this was a last-ditch attempt to resist the forced deportations and killings. The Armenians as a whole only wanted equal rights from the Ottomans. That is why in part Armenians, even the parties, allied themselves w/ the young Turks when they first came into power because they were promised all that. - Fedayee 16:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This was a ditch effort save hide when attacking the Ottomans failed and Russians could not get there in time. Nearby Trabzon eventually was invaded by the the Russians along with Armenian volunteer units and all the Turks butchered - but nobody cares about Muslims apparently. This was a hot war zone where Armenians wanted to secede from Ottoman lands and take some land with them. The rebels who holed up were attacking Ottoman positions behind battle lines cohorting with the Russian Army, and armed by them, and were accordingly dealt with by the authorities. Armenians had equal opportuniy in Ottoman lands, but they wanted more. The first Armenian president was the son of the Governor of Egypt for god sakes!  Gulbenkia,n the richest man ever was an Armenian working directly for the sultan - because of him Iraq was lost and he benefited by taking 5 percent of all the oil revenue. There were many many Armenians who were educated at Yale and other Amercican colleges, I do not think they were destitue to achive that. They,  along with the Armenian diaspora of now, have been working vigorosly, almost as an obsession, to take all the Turkish lands and annihilite all Turks from anatolia - mening ethinc cleansins. If it was not for Ataturk, there would be no Turks left becasue the Armenians would have butchered them all. so if you want to stray away from the subject and try to revise history on talk pages as well, I can counter that, too. More than half the world does not recognise AG. Most of the countries that do, fought agaisnt the Ottoman empire during WWI so their motiver are obvious. Not even Aemrica wont recognize it becasue the US knows that it was mostly responsible for everything - becasue they wanted the OIL. This is always been about money and land, nothing else -just like Iraq. And Iraq is a continuation of what happened in WW1..it's not over yet. Anyway, this subject was an armed rebellion. --Oguz1 17:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But what you don't understand is that those volunteer units you speak of were all Russian citizens. There were thousands more Armenians that were in the Ottoman military then all the volunteer units combined! Able bodied Armenians were called to arms just like every Ottoman citizen was. The Armenians were later reduced to labour batallions and worked to their deaths. The Armenians had a big part in the economy but they did not have the same rights as the Muslim citizens. A Armenian man would need a few Muslim witnesses to be cleared of a charge whilst a Muslim would need way less, non-Muslims were denied any kind of weaponry etc. All this aren't equality, business wise yes, human being wise no. Armenians were freely allowed, just like anyone, to go to Europe to study, in fact the founders of the Hunchakians were all European educated students. No one is denying these. And you are very paranoid and are almost acting like what Nazis use to think of the Jews if you think there's an Armenian diaspora conspiracy that wants to kill off all the Turks and take all their land. That is insane!!! Most countries do not recognize because of realpolitik, a phenomenon in the world of politics based on selfishness, own gains. Only a few countries dared defy Turkish governmental blackmail of cutting relations over the Armenian Genocide. The fact that Armenia as an independent state did not exist for 70 years also did not help in getting people aware that an Armenian Genocide had occured. The whole 'karahisar event (which is a mere 3.5 lines in the whole article), which I have explained a few times now, is the result of the Armenian genocide. There were no armed conflicts after 1908, the Young Turks were initially seen as saviours of Armenians, they promised reform to those same organizations you hate so much, they were allies. - Fedayee 21:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

text: The term "natives" is offense in English and has been replaced to "people", because a person can be notable of a place and have it not be rooted in racist policy and nationalism. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 02:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

text: I'm going to unprotect the page; you can make the changes yourself. CMummert · talk 14:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

text: She was sanjak centre in orderly provinces of Rum, Erzurum and Trabzon and Eyalet of Sivas during Ottoman rule.
I have removed the following sentence. Although its meaning is not clear to me there seems to be some interesting information embedded in the non-standard English. Please fix it, cite it, an put it back, if you can. Aramgar (talk) 20:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: *Şebinkarahisar is a district of Giresun Province, Turkey. tr.wikipedia.org Şebinkarahisar —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.224.206.214 (talk) 15:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: True. Khoikhoi 02:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur.--Doktor Gonzo 16:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Şebinkarahisar 

message: If you feel the sudden urge to advertise Armenian heroism at least do it in a sub section of the article, not in the bloody intro. And keep it NPOV and less dramatic if you can so it doesn't induce vomit.--Doktor Gonzo 16:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The vomit and advertisement of Armenian heroism is not nice either. No one meant to put that in the intro if you wanna call that one-liner an intro anyway. You could've, w/out vomiting, asked it to be moved to a section and less POV. You didn't need to remove the entire paragraph either. - Fedayee 17:01, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just pointed out what should be edited, wasn't interested in doing it myself. And I was just being honest with my previous comment, but at least I kept it on the discussion page. Anyway, see you around Fedayee.--Doktor Gonzo 17:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is still in its infancy. If you want to read a vomit-inducing article, read this one. Happy editing, Hakob 00:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is our second encounter and the second time you are making a comparison to an irrelevant article that you think concerns me because of my nationality.--Doktor Gonzo 11:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There will probably be more in the future since decorum seems to be an alien idea to you. Hakob 01:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:NPA and WP:POINT. I was actually warning you.--Doktor Gonzo 10:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Take it easy guys.. Baristarim 02:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Be sensible 

message: I took the time to write the History section of the article . I mentioned the Armenian thing too and gave inter-link but it is not enough apperantly. An Armenian Genocide sub-section is being created again.
This is what I wrote to Fedayee:
"It is a part of the history of the city so I mentioned it and gave a direct inter-link to the article. Are you demanding an Armenian Genocide sub-section in every Eastern Turkish city article?"
I will not get into any edit wars. I invite everyone to be reasonable.--Doktor Gonzo 14:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, first you tell me to create a sub-section and now you are against the sub-section...right. What's so bad about the sub-section anyway? And I will be removing the NPOV tag because it is just a bad faith tag there just because it talks about the Armenian Genocide. I have changed the wording to be as NPOV as possible...cmon be reasonable here. - Fedayee 21:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I asked you to create an appropriate section, don't you think in the context of this article, an article about a city, History is more suited than Armenian Genocide? And I still have problems with your writing, it depicts the event as if Şebin Karahisar was a sovereign Armenian city resisting against an Ottoman invasion. And you don't move the NPOV tag until the discussions have been resolved, that's the whole idea of it.--Doktor Gonzo 09:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Plus I think one sentence about the event is more than enough, it already has an article of its own, the internal-link directs. I summarized its 2500 year old history in just one paragpraph and you are sparing another paragraph just for one event that already has its own article, would you call that balanced?--Doktor Gonzo 10:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah but dude the Armenian Genocide was not a section, it was a sub-section in the History section itself. Also, the summarizing of the history section is not the final version...the article is still a stub and in the moment this article expands, the entire history section must expand too. And come on now, the small paragraph on the AG is a mere 3.5 lines. There is no big detail in it. How it started, by who, against who and what was the result. It's basic coverage of the event. I hope your minor edit took care of the problem that it depicted it as an invasion. Cheers. - Fedayee 16:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  The "resistance" as you call it, started as a result of Armenian-Russian alliance, Armenian uprising, and the consequent Russian invasion, all of which developed over a period of decades. Ottoman forces were responding to the Russian invasion of Trabzon and the Armenian land grabs. Trabzon evetually fell briefly and Giresun (actually this town was part of Sivas at the time). I think that's called civil war, is it not? Unless there's expicit evidence that says people were kiled no reason but their ethinicity, I think the we can change this to a civil war and a WW1 battle between the Ottomans and the Armenians. --Oguz1 15:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Armenian Genocide sub-section 

message: this here
"The city was the location of the Shabin-Karahisar Resistance where Hunchakian party allied Armenians held their grounds for up to a month against the Ottoman forces during the Armenian Genocide.[2][3][4] After a month of fighting, the Ottoman army defeated the resistance and massacred the remaining survivors.[5][6]"
First off, AG is not a time period, so you can not say "during AG". why dont we just say everything that happened between 1915-1917 happened during AG and get it over with. YAY! This is not the same this as ghetto riots, or fighting for freedom. These people admittetly (even here are were members of a party and an militia that wanted to establish an Armenian nation from Ottoman lands. There was just cause to fight them and kill them on the part of the Ottomans. In no way does that constitue a massacre or genocide.
I changed it to this.
"The city was the location of the Shabin-Karahisar Resistance where Hunchakian party allied Armenians held rebelled against the Ottoman Empire in hopesof establishing an Armenian naltion from Ottoman lands [2][3][4]. After a month of fighting, the Ottoman army defeated the resistance and killed the rebels[5][6]"
If you evidence to show there some AG plot connection, please show it before you make a revert. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oguz1 (talk • contribs) 16:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're not making sense here. The Armenian Genocide could be used as time period. If you want wiki-proof, visit the Holocaust page and ctrl+f "during the Holocaust" and see how many they can be used. I will be adding 1915 next to during the AG as well. All the references state that this was a last-ditch attempt to resist the forced deportations and killings. The Armenians as a whole only wanted equal rights from the Ottomans. That is why in part Armenians, even the parties, allied themselves w/ the young Turks when they first came into power because they were promised all that. - Fedayee 16:39, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This was a ditch effort save hide when attacking the Ottomans failed and Russians could not get there in time. Nearby Trabzon eventually was invaded by the the Russians along with Armenian volunteer units and all the Turks butchered - but nobody cares about Muslims apparently. This was a hot war zone where Armenians wanted to secede from Ottoman lands and take some land with them. The rebels who holed up were attacking Ottoman positions behind battle lines cohorting with the Russian Army, and armed by them, and were accordingly dealt with by the authorities. Armenians had equal opportuniy in Ottoman lands, but they wanted more. The first Armenian president was the son of the Governor of Egypt for god sakes!  Gulbenkia,n the richest man ever was an Armenian working directly for the sultan - because of him Iraq was lost and he benefited by taking 5 percent of all the oil revenue. There were many many Armenians who were educated at Yale and other Amercican colleges, I do not think they were destitue to achive that. They,  along with the Armenian diaspora of now, have been working vigorosly, almost as an obsession, to take all the Turkish lands and annihilite all Turks from anatolia - mening ethinc cleansins. If it was not for Ataturk, there would be no Turks left becasue the Armenians would have butchered them all. so if you want to stray away from the subject and try to revise history on talk pages as well, I can counter that, too. More than half the world does not recognise AG. Most of the countries that do, fought agaisnt the Ottoman empire during WWI so their motiver are obvious. Not even Aemrica wont recognize it becasue the US knows that it was mostly responsible for everything - becasue they wanted the OIL. This is always been about money and land, nothing else -just like Iraq. And Iraq is a continuation of what happened in WW1..it's not over yet. Anyway, this subject was an armed rebellion. --Oguz1 17:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But what you don't understand is that those volunteer units you speak of were all Russian citizens. There were thousands more Armenians that were in the Ottoman military then all the volunteer units combined! Able bodied Armenians were called to arms just like every Ottoman citizen was. The Armenians were later reduced to labour batallions and worked to their deaths. The Armenians had a big part in the economy but they did not have the same rights as the Muslim citizens. A Armenian man would need a few Muslim witnesses to be cleared of a charge whilst a Muslim would need way less, non-Muslims were denied any kind of weaponry etc. All this aren't equality, business wise yes, human being wise no. Armenians were freely allowed, just like anyone, to go to Europe to study, in fact the founders of the Hunchakians were all European educated students. No one is denying these. And you are very paranoid and are almost acting like what Nazis use to think of the Jews if you think there's an Armenian diaspora conspiracy that wants to kill off all the Turks and take all their land. That is insane!!! Most countries do not recognize because of realpolitik, a phenomenon in the world of politics based on selfishness, own gains. Only a few countries dared defy Turkish governmental blackmail of cutting relations over the Armenian Genocide. The fact that Armenia as an independent state did not exist for 70 years also did not help in getting people aware that an Armenian Genocide had occured. The whole 'karahisar event (which is a mere 3.5 lines in the whole article), which I have explained a few times now, is the result of the Armenian genocide. There were no armed conflicts after 1908, the Young Turks were initially seen as saviours of Armenians, they promised reform to those same organizations you hate so much, they were allies. - Fedayee 21:54, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  OPOV, weasel words, potentially loaded senteces, snytax missing, all kinds of violation 

message: I think Ara Güler is from Şebinkarahisar. Zirowerdy 23:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The term "natives" is offense in English and has been replaced to "people", because a person can be notable of a place and have it not be rooted in racist policy and nationalism. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 02:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Notable Natives

message: here is a fairly large expansion to the whole article including; coordinates in the infobox; new sections on etymology, geography and places of interest; slight additions to the ancient history and a sub-heading for the controversial paragraph on the Armenians (but no change to that paragraph); more links to sites containing photographs and more famous people.  Istanbuljohnm 07:15, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to unprotect the page; you can make the changes yourself. CMummert · talk 14:13, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: edit request

message: The website cited for the Ottoman conquest of Şebinkarahisar in 1478 is wrong . The origin of the error is perhaps Hasan Tahsin Okutan, Şebinkarahisar ve civarı (Şebinkarahisar, 1948). Bryer and Winfield's Byzantine Monuments and Topography of the Pontos repeats the error (vol. 1, p. 148), citing Okutan. It seems that Şebinkarahisar fell to the Ottomans in 1473 following Fatih Mehmet's defeat of Uzun Hasan at the battles of Tercan/Derxene and Otluk Beli (as yet without a Wikipedia articles and those tedious infoboxes). Mordtmann's article in the Encyclopaedia of Islam and Franz Babinger's Mehmed the Conquerer and His Time support 1473 as the year the Ottomans took over. Aramgar (talk) 06:41, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ottoman conquest 

message: :She was sanjak centre in orderly provinces of Rum, Erzurum and Trabzon and Eyalet of Sivas during Ottoman rule.
I have removed the following sentence. Although its meaning is not clear to me there seems to be some interesting information embedded in the non-standard English. Please fix it, cite it, an put it back, if you can. Aramgar (talk) 20:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Administrative history

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Şebinkarahisar. 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/20120915062836/http://www.karalahana.com/makaleler/kitap/pontus-antik-cagdan-gunumuze-karadeniz-etnik-siyasi-tarihi.htm to http://www.karalahana.com/makaleler/kitap/pontus-antik-cagdan-gunumuze-karadeniz-etnik-siyasi-tarihi.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:26, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified