Talk:Istanbul/Archive 2

message: It is stated that there is a national library in Beyazid. Isnt that simply IÜ library? On the site of the Turkish national library - http://www.mkutup.gov.tr/ - no library outside Ankara is mentioned. Bertilvidet 08:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed this reference. Please revert me if I am wrong. Bertilvidet 23:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  National library 

message: Just for the record, I Oppose' moving this record from Istanbul.
But I am also removing a notice slapped on this talk page, long after the earlier discussions, with no corresponding listing at WP:RM.  Gene Nygaard 22:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move from Istanbul

message: Please keep your eyes open for edits such as this one.
I am not sure if the edit is legitimate, so I've left the edit alone. Kareeser|Talk! 01:14, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential vandal 

message: It would be interesting to show the historical ethnic composition (in percentages) throughout the time. Does anyone has any data on this? bogdan 16:43, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We could get a rundown on the religious composition of Istanbul, because the Ottomans classified people not by ethnicity, but by religion (see Millet). Then there are other issues to deal with - historically there were Turkish-speaking muslims, Bulgarian-speaking muslims, Romany-speaking muslims as well as turkish-speaking christians, who in the end were legally considered "Greeks" during the 1920s population transfer process.--Kilhan 18:03, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

text: U forgot to mention the greek-speaking muslims, some hundrends of thousands of who still exist... --Hectorian 18:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demographics/ethnic composition 

message: Why does Wikipedia claim that Istanbul is "the only metropolis in the world which is on two continents" since it is situated on both sides of the Bosphorus Strait? According to the Wikipedia article on Europe, this is only one of several (fairly arbitrary) definitions of the Europe-Asia boundary. In reality, the distinction between Europe and Asia is so blurry that it is difficult to place Turkey in either. Culturally, Turkey shares European and Middle Eastern characteristics. Andrew_pmk | Talk 04:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to that article there seems to be concensus on the fact that the Black Sea and the Medeteranian are part of the "border" between Asia and Europe. Guess what connects the two? Of course, if there is another metropolis that borders on two continents, feel free to add it. :) I highly doubt Wikipedia is the place to discuss a redefinition of the border between Asia and Europe. JeroenHoek 17:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We could indeed clarify that it is the geographical border. Cultural, political etc. borders are per se harder to define and thus more contested. Bertilvidet 18:42, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Istanbul in both Europe and Asia? 

message: /* Etymology */  - In couple different pages the extend of this discussion is going on, please refer your information to Istanbul (Etymology) page . Thanks. --OttomanReference 15:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ethymology page. 

message: I have always wanted to go and see Istanbul/Constantinople as I am a great lover of both Greek History and Architecture in general. Is it safe like Western capitols or is it like middle-eastern capitols where it is dangerous to go to?
:One is tempted to think this is a bit of a joke question, but let's take it seriously: it's perfectly safe, and in all likelihood, much safer than any "Western capitol" that you care to mention (even though it's not the country's capital). —Saposcat 20:17, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If taken this question seriously, i have to say that it is, in general, as safe as most european metropoles...id est: there are places and neighbourhoods that it would be better not to visit. the center of the city is as safe as the center of Athens, Rome or Paris, and much safer than the eastern european cities. on the other hand, someone should have in mind that there are frequent incidents of terrorism  in the city (November 2003, kurdish bomb attacks, etc). not to mention the Grey Wolves... it would be a rare case, but better not come across any of them... --Hectorian 21:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the city safe for greeks to go to? 

message: Can we change (meaning both add and remove) the pictures in the gallery under History? I know we are short of images now, but it would be visually more attracting if we could add some colored images (drawings) from Ottoman times of Istanbul. Besides, current three images all look the same despite their captions. DeliDumrul 04:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You might try looking at the images Tommiks has uploaded. He seems to have uploaded a great deal of pictures "from trvallers guide constantinopole c1878" (scroll down a bit). —Khoikhoi 05:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I didn't really take a good look at all of them, but none of the ones I saw were color. You might try looking at the Library of Congress. —Khoikhoi 05:21, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Hmmm, it appears the images I was talking about can all be found at Lifestyle of the Ottoman Empire. —Khoikhoi 05:24, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Wow, those are great! I believe I might have seen a black & white version of the first one before, or at least something very similar. —Khoikhoi 05:59, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We have sixteen of them now. Check them out here. DeliDumrul 06:44, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I've added your new images to :Category:Istanbul images. It would be better if we could keep track of the photos, like in a category. (or whatever is more suitable :) DeliDumrul 17:13, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture gallery under history 

message: I'm told there's a consensus to keep historic names out of the first sentence. Whoever reached that consensus is simply wrong.
The first sentence of the article is the definition of the topic, and it should include the most relevant data about the topic. A definition of Istanbul which doesn't mention that it was previously called Byzantium and Constantinople is a useless definition of Istanbul.
I can see how some people would find this controversial, but allowing the quality of articles to suffer because of petty nationalism one way or the other is simply wrong. Zocky | picture popups 13:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I forgot to mention that listing relevant other names in the first sentence is standard practice in Wikipedia. See Danube, Gdansk, Graz, etc. To illustrate a potentially controversial case, the article about my home town (Maribor), includes its German name, even though the names is currently not in use even in German texts, and the last time it was used was during the bloody occupation in WWII. Yet, defining Maribor without mentioning its historic name would be useless. Zocky | picture popups 13:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, the consensus seems to be to not list even the official spelling anywhere in the intro.... Zocky | picture popups 14:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, "That's not just official spelling, that's the Turkish name for the city." :) Anyways, there was a long and bloody discussion, even to the point how the Turkish letter I with a dot is pronounced and wether the English and Turkish pronunciations are different from each other or not. As for the relevant other names, the list is too long for the first line, even for the article itself so it's moved to a seperate page. It looks like, in history, almost every nation who heard about the city gave a different name to the city. I think it's better to leave it this way. DeliDumrul 14:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And believe me, the discussion was not limited to this page. It was discussed between almost every user who edited this article and on discussion pages of other Greek and Turkish cities (which is the wrong way to do it). Anyways, I'm not disagreeing with all your arguments, I  reverted your edit just to avoid any more conflicts. DeliDumrul 14:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not all other relevant names are equally important. The ones that this should have to satisfy the minimum is the official spelling, and the English historic names, a grand total of 3, which would be hardly atypical for a large city with a lot of history. Zocky | picture popups 14:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally understand what you mean, and we have to stick to what's right rather than what pleases most of the editors. But once you make that edit, I'm afraid this place will become a mess with everybody poking into it. Regards, DeliDumrul 14:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I was one of the users who argued against including the other spellings on the first line based on the same argument you put down. However, I don't want to follow my preference for now, due to my worries I expressed above. DeliDumrul 15:04, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historic names 

message: As we know, all wowturkey.com images removed and I think there is no quality image of Istanbul. Someone should upload cool photos like old version.
:I'm gonna add some cool photos in so far as I can. Doluca 11:33, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images of Istanbul 

message: I came in on off an internal link from Hattusa pointing to other world heritagesites in Turkey and mentioning that parts of Istanbul are inscribed. There is no mention of this in the Istanbul article. Is there a separate article - meaning someone should change the link, or should someone include mention of the UNESCO inscribed sites? --5telios 10:41, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  World heritage 

message: It took me five hours to upload and reformat picture gallery. Anyone who attemps to damage these pictures may be subject to GNIY complaints. If you are planning to re-edit the gallery, email me first at proleotech@yahoo.com. ltimur
:How about using some of the pics from Commons? Bertilvidet 20:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Pictures 

message: Sorry to say, but most of the article and the discussion parts deal with names and history of the city at a level of obsession. Every name is explained where it comes from, which is ridiculious. Important aspects like Administration, population and architecture and their history are missing whereas it is full with text-book unrelated history and misunderstood concept of demographics-population section. History does not mean history of the rulers, but life, fires, earthquakes, attackes, epidemies, city planining etc. However to change significant parts of it definitely will cause edit wars or strong reactions. What is the solution? Argonit 15:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The article is very poor - help needed?

message: If people care to go to Google Earth and look at the southern shoreline of Istanbul, almost due south of the Blue Mosque, they will see what appears to be a large ship lying on its side (refs 41.00.08.51 N, 28.58.34.15 E). It wasn't there the last time I looked. Does anyone know what it is? There also appears to have a long cable running out diagonally into the Sea of Marmara. Adam 16:27, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup, its there. Near to Kumkapi. See photo at commons. Now it is completely rusty, split into two and is being broken up. Bertilvidet 19:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Istanbul shipwreck?

message: thanks.
:Done. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:52, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Please add io:Istanbul and oc:Istambol

message: I think there's too much POV pushing around here. The Greek name is immediately relevant (due to the indigenous Greek minority and the Greek Patriarchate), and frankly, I think we should also include the Armenian and Ladino names. The see other names formula is POV pushing; wouldn’t it be possible to say «Thessaloniki (Greek: Θεσσαλονίκη; see other names)» at the Thessaloniki article. There is nothing wrong with including foreign names, even names which are purely of historical interest as there is no longer a community speaking that language at the city in question (e.g. Turkish in Thessalonica).--Tekleni 15:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV pushing 

message: The recent Merge tag added in October is being discussed at Talk:Byzantium#Merging. -- Stbalbach 13:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge tag