Talk:Hakkâri (city)

message: == Assyrians ==
Assyrians are indogenous people to Hakkari! Who is putting in Assyrian POV in everyarticle!?!?
:First of all, when you are writing in wikipedia close off with 4 tidles (~) to show your identity. Don't make me come over to east turkey and chop your fingers off. Second, the asuri christians are native of anatolia, unlike you indo-iranians who migrated to the mountanous areas of present day north iraq. Untill 1915 you did not have anything to do with turkey, let alone claiming parts of it. The majority of these assyrian christians look anatolian and could easily mengle with the turkish population of turkey which is also in majority native to its homeland (excluding kurds). As a turk I am of the opinion that you kurds should be exiled to iraq in return for the assyrian christians who left in wwI. Exiling our anatolian brothers and sisters was a big mistake which was only because we thought they were armenian. And Hakkari is indeed a homeland of the assyrian christian, just as the provinces of urfa, diyarbakir, batman, bitlis and siirt. End of story. 77.250.189.211 (talk) 04:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I dont know who added this. But the point the person was trying to make that that number of Assyrians were much higher 100 years ago in Hakkari then it is today. I remember reading quite a few books stating that Hakkari had a Christian majority and had a population in the hundred of thousand, but that Christian population had Armenian elements as well Chaldean 03:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, then let's remove that false sentence. Awat 21:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

text: ethnic identities were not established ? Of course... --82.236.107.61 (talk) 15:11, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Tabi. Kendilerini müslüman olarak tanımlıyorlardı. Kaynaklara bakıldığında Soykırımı işleyen, Balkan ve Kafkas göçmenleri (Balkan göçmenlerin büyük bir çoğunluğu Türk ama yine kendilerini müslüman olarak tanımlıyorlardı). Birde Hamidiye Alayları ise Kürt (bunlar da yine müslüman). Ama burada Kurds dediğimiz zaman gayri-müslüm Kürtleri de dahil edilmiş olacak. Neyse ben kaynaklandıracağım. Ancak Bedirhan Massacre için Kürt aşiretlerinden olduğu belirtileblir.  Takabeg (talk) 15:30, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't understand, please speak english --82.236.107.61 (talk) 15:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

text: It was done by regular Ottoman Army and Kurdish irregulars. I am not the one who added that peice of info and you are the one who blanked the section and you start accusing people of spreading agendas! p.s. please sign your comments with 4 tildes.--Rafy talk 19:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

text: I can't feel but to feel that I'm being trolled by a Kurdish nationalist who doesn't sign his posts. I am not claiming any lands, I am not asking any one to apologise or repent, there are simply some reliable info that are related and it can be added here. If you have a source that claims that Kurdish irregulars weren't involved then please do add it. Otherwise I will revert (exclamation mark)--Rafy talk 19:32, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

text: But they were not part of the regular Ottoman Army since they had a semi-autonomous status. Those areas were even claimed by Kurdish leaders to be part of an independent Kurdish state at the ensuing peace conference.--Rafy talk 19:46, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

text: They joined as a independent party just like the UK joined the US in its war, should we consider them both as one party? Anyway your arguments don't make sense so I'm considering you edits WP:BF, please dont revert back otherwise you will be breaking the WP:3RR.--Rafy talk 20:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

text: It probably depends on the focus of the article. If it is more focused on pre-Ottoman history, then I think the current links should go to the modern Turkey version since there is a continuity between the Ottoman sancak of Hakkari and the modern province of Hakkari. If it is more on the Ottoman period, then I think your suggestion is best. If it is a mix of both then it's hard to say until it is written! You might want to create it and then ask again before changing any links. Ordtoy (talk) 14:47, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, I will start the article soon. I think however that the region wasn't confined with a specific administrative region during the Ottoman rule. Some of the literature I read depicts Hakkari encompassing parts of Mosul and Van vilayets.--Rafy talk 21:46, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If I'm not mistaken the Ottoman sandjak (which was in Van vilayet) is more or less equivalent to today's province except for a few small parts on the border which are in Iraq (at the time Mosul vilayet). This needs proper verification. Ordtoy (talk) 00:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

text: The official spelling has an "â" in it according to TDK 
== Move discussion in progress ==
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Hakkari which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 21:17, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: Assyrians are indogenous people to Hakkari! Who is putting in Assyrian POV in everyarticle!?!?
:First of all, when you are writing in wikipedia close off with 4 tidles (~) to show your identity. Don't make me come over to east turkey and chop your fingers off. Second, the asuri christians are native of anatolia, unlike you indo-iranians who migrated to the mountanous areas of present day north iraq. Untill 1915 you did not have anything to do with turkey, let alone claiming parts of it. The majority of these assyrian christians look anatolian and could easily mengle with the turkish population of turkey which is also in majority native to its homeland (excluding kurds). As a turk I am of the opinion that you kurds should be exiled to iraq in return for the assyrian christians who left in wwI. Exiling our anatolian brothers and sisters was a big mistake which was only because we thought they were armenian. And Hakkari is indeed a homeland of the assyrian christian, just as the provinces of urfa, diyarbakir, batman, bitlis and siirt. End of story. 77.250.189.211 (talk) 04:53, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assyrians 

message: (This is not a denial that they were in majority or that there wasn't a genocide.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.105.159.74 (talk • contribs) 10:31, 21 November 2006.
: I agree. I dont know who added this. But the point the person was trying to make that that number of Assyrians were much higher 100 years ago in Hakkari then it is today. I remember reading quite a few books stating that Hakkari had a Christian majority and had a population in the hundred of thousand, but that Christian population had Armenian elements as well Chaldean 03:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, then let's remove that false sentence. Awat 21:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "85% Assyrians lived in surrounding Hakkari" 

message: Great part of Christian people in the area, were killed by the Muslims during the Armenian Genocide and Assyrian Genocide. 
is better.
Maybe most of slaughters could be Kurdish, but ethnic identities of Kurds, Turks ... were not established. And they called themselves Muslim. Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 14:53, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: ethnic identities were not established ? Of course... --82.236.107.61 (talk) 15:11, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

text: Tabi. Kendilerini müslüman olarak tanımlıyorlardı. Kaynaklara bakıldığında Soykırımı işleyen, Balkan ve Kafkas göçmenleri (Balkan göçmenlerin büyük bir çoğunluğu Türk ama yine kendilerini müslüman olarak tanımlıyorlardı). Birde Hamidiye Alayları ise Kürt (bunlar da yine müslüman). Ama burada Kurds dediğimiz zaman gayri-müslüm Kürtleri de dahil edilmiş olacak. Neyse ben kaynaklandıracağım. Ancak Bedirhan Massacre için Kürt aşiretlerinden olduğu belirtileblir.  Takabeg (talk) 15:30, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't understand, please speak english --82.236.107.61 (talk) 15:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Genocide

message: Most of the Genocide by done by the 'Hamidiye Alaylari-Kurdish".
If your not happy deal with it, this is not a place for you to spread propaganda.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kurdwiki (talk • contribs) 19:07, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It was done by regular Ottoman Army and Kurdish irregulars. I am not the one who added that peice of info and you are the one who blanked the section and you start accusing people of spreading agendas! p.s. please sign your comments with 4 tildes.--Rafy talk 19:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

text: I can't feel but to feel that I'm being trolled by a Kurdish nationalist who doesn't sign his posts. I am not claiming any lands, I am not asking any one to apologise or repent, there are simply some reliable info that are related and it can be added here. If you have a source that claims that Kurdish irregulars weren't involved then please do add it. Otherwise I will revert (exclamation mark)--Rafy talk 19:32, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

text: But they were not part of the regular Ottoman Army since they had a semi-autonomous status. Those areas were even claimed by Kurdish leaders to be part of an independent Kurdish state at the ensuing peace conference.--Rafy talk 19:46, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

text: They joined as a independent party just like the UK joined the US in its war, should we consider them both as one party? Anyway your arguments don't make sense so I'm considering you edits WP:BF, please dont revert back otherwise you will be breaking the WP:3RR.--Rafy talk 20:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Genocide' 

message: I intend on creating a kind of a fork article of the historical region known as Hakkari. Just like how it's done with Nineveh and Ninawa Governorate, Macedonia (country) and Macedonia (region)...etc. This would mean however that all wikilinks that deal with a period prior to the formation of modern Turkey will be directed to the new article. Does anyone have objections here? --Rafy talk 14:02, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It probably depends on the focus of the article. If it is more focused on pre-Ottoman history, then I think the current links should go to the modern Turkey version since there is a continuity between the Ottoman sancak of Hakkari and the modern province of Hakkari. If it is more on the Ottoman period, then I think your suggestion is best. If it is a mix of both then it's hard to say until it is written! You might want to create it and then ask again before changing any links. Ordtoy (talk) 14:47, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Great, I will start the article soon. I think however that the region wasn't confined with a specific administrative region during the Ottoman rule. Some of the literature I read depicts Hakkari encompassing parts of Mosul and Van vilayets.--Rafy talk 21:46, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: If I'm not mistaken the Ottoman sandjak (which was in Van vilayet) is more or less equivalent to today's province except for a few small parts on the border which are in Iraq (at the time Mosul vilayet). This needs proper verification. Ordtoy (talk) 00:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Hakkari article 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Hakkari which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 21:17, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: It's not possible to add anything related to Assyrians, which are the Indigenous people of Hakkari, without it getting deleted by random wikipedia accounts. It's very disappointing that the admins don't do anything against it and allow Kurds to spread their propaganda on these articles. I edited the real meaning of Hakkari with word books of Universities, but the change got deleted. On the other article that I edited about Hakkari, the Syriac name got deleted. It's very disappointing that Wikipedia allows Kurdish propaganda to dwell on such articles that discriminate the Assyrian people.  FalitoMardinoyo47 (talk) 10:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kurdish propaganda