Talk:Republic Protests

message: This article summarizes the events in the elections Aftermath of the rally sections. I think that sections should be moved to Turkish presidential election, 2007 article. This article should be limited to 14 and 29 April events only. It is more convenient.Ayasi 22:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Without the reasons for the rally there is no point in having an article. This article focuses on the rally, their rationale and what the results were in the aftermath. I disagree with the move suggestion but I would agree that Turkish presidential election, 2007 should cover the political issues mentioned here in greater detail. -- Cat chi? 04:35, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Article questioned

message: There’s a big dispute over the number of protesters in attendance in all of the protests. All of the news sources with highly inflated numbers references Atatürkist Thought Association’s (ADD) estimate attendance numbers.  They first estimate the area in terms of m2 and then multiply it by 3 (assuming 3 people per 1 m2). While everyone agrees the exact area the protests covered, Association makes an incorrect argument stating that you can take an area (which looks nothing like a square) and assume that area is a square. After calculating the correct perimeter, they incorrectly make the “square” assumption and divide perimeter by four to get the side and multiply the side by itself to get an area.
Example:
Consider a  Rectangle, with a perimeter of 100, length of 45 and a width of 5.
The actual Area is (length) X (width) = (45) X (5) = 225
Using the incorrect “square” assumption:
Side = 100 / 4 = 25
Area = (25) X (25) = 625 (incorrect area)
Using the incorrect "square" assumption would've given an inflated area value.
This is ADD's calculation method. Their calculation method defies the laws of mathematics. This is how they're coming up 7 digit attendance numbers. I keep posting this on the page but it keeps getting deleted.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.150.111.130 (talk) 17:27, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is your analysis, Wikipedia can only report this if it is published somewhere, maybe in a book, journal, newspaper. Kavas (talk) 00:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inflated Attendance Numbers 

message: Both the 'leftist' characterization, and citing CHP as the organizer is right out of local (Turkish) Islamist propaganda (first is unkown, second is -- almost -- materially false as about 100-300 NGOs have been involed).  Also, the language about the reasons is childish.  I have no time to fix, but I put in a POV tag.  85.102.155.228 01:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: reverted Nuri Delen's edit. leftist characterization might be somewhat true, a better characterization would be anti-AKP. Certainly CHP did not organize it, many NGO's did. Deniz Baykal, Zeki Sezer, Murat Karayalcin tried to use the last one for their own political purposes but I don't think their attendance there helped them at all. DenizTC 03:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: "They were mainly organized by some leftist groups under the leadership of CHP,  to prevent the election of a President whose wife is observant of Islamic traditions such as head scarves for women. Organizers were afraid that observance of Islamic traditions by the head of the state would encourage the rest of the social strata to undermine the strict principle of separation of religion and state (for all practical purposes, can be understood  as "no sincerely religious persons may hold any important public office whatsoever, except perhaps Imams employed by State in local mosques. And this fact that state pays the salaries of said Imams should not at all be considered against this great principle of Laiklik because we are Turks and we have our own peculiarities or in the words of Mr. Ataturk "Biz bize benzeriz" ") and therefore, in the protester's imagination, undo the gains towards "Ataturk's vision of modernity." 
sounds childish. But that is the truth. Perhaps all this is a sign of Turkey becoming more mature and hence the pain. Nuri Delen, —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NuriDelen (talk • contribs) 14:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: You are welcome to think that, however that is not a verifiable/reliable source. As per WP:NOT#SOAPBOX: Propaganda or advocacy of any kind. Of course, an article can report objectively about such things, as long as an attempt is made to approach a  neutral point of view. You might wish to go to Usenet or start a blog if you want to convince people of the merits of your favorite views. -- Cat chi? 20:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I added the ref article for the left politics behind the rallies. Nuri Delen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by NuriDelen (talk • contribs) 19:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly, please learn to sign your comments with a --~~~~. The source you provided does not establish CHP as an organizer. It does however establish a bunch of lefteist leaders attended the fifth rally which I have now mentioned on the relevant section. -- Cat chi? 20:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda in the first few paragraphs  

message: I don't think citing newspaper website polls adds any credibility to what's said.  Papers themselves admit they are of no real use (in small print).  There may still be some point in including them as they show what the newspaper (be it 'mainstream' or not) and the readership [want to] believe but they should not be used in a way to indicate what the public opinion is.  85.101.99.27 10:22, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It clearly is stated that it is a poll by CNN, the claim isn't that this is the public opinion. -- Cat chi? 20:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newspaper web polls as sources?  

message: :The current government consistently underestimates the rally attendance. The Izmir police, which reports to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, has reported the attendance as low as 500,000; a serious underestimate paralleling that of the AKP government.
I have removed the above material from the article in the absence of sources. -- Cat chi? 21:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed from article 

message: Upon its review on November 4, 2007, this good article nomination was quick-failed because it:
contains cleanup banners including, but not limited to, , , , , etc, or large numbers of , , , or similar tags
thus making it ineligible for good article consideration.
This article did not receive a thorough review, and may not meet other parts of the good article criteria.  The tag has been there for some time and, apparentely, was known about before nomination. I encourage you to remedy this problem (and any others) and resubmit it for consideration.  If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to have it reassessed.  Thank you for your work so far.— Cheers, CP 16:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed "good article" nomination

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Republic Protests. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070422055215/http://www.cnn.com:80/2007/WORLD/europe/04/14/turkey.protest.ap/index.html to http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/04/14/turkey.protest.ap/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070428074555/http://www.cnn.com:80/2007/WORLD/europe/04/24/turkey.candidate.reut/index.html to http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/04/24/turkey.candidate.reut/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:18, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Republic Protests. 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/20070416020020/http://www.tsk.mil.tr:80/anitkabir/guncel/faaliyetler/gunluk_ziyaretci/2007/nisan2007.html to http://www.tsk.mil.tr/anitkabir/guncel/faaliyetler/gunluk_ziyaretci/2007/nisan2007.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070213214205/http://dosyalar.hurriyet.com.tr:80/almanak2005/details.asp?sid=5&nid=121 to http://dosyalar.hurriyet.com.tr/almanak2005/details.asp?sid=5&nid=121
*Added  tag to http://www.skyturk.tv/news.jsp?newsId=64828&c=1
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930222218/http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/international/ticker/detail/Turks_protest_ahead_of_early_elections.html?siteSect=143&sid=7813908&cKey=1179061645000 to http://www.swissinfo.org/eng/international/ticker/detail/Turks_protest_ahead_of_early_elections.html?siteSect=143&sid=7813908&cKey=1179061645000
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070317122439/http://www.cumhuriyetinesahipcik.com:80/ to http://www.cumhuriyetinesahipcik.com
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) 10:52, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified