Talk:History of the Republic of Turkey/Archive 1

message: And why do half of Armenians in North America still keep Turkish lastnames ?
 The family names are selected from a list of "approved" ethnically Turkish names and become hereditary. I do not know the correctness of this claim, but at least in some cases, names of not Turkic origin were allowed to be kept, e.g., Sami Kohen (a columnist in Milliyet newspaper ), Avadis Hacinliyan (a physics professor in Bosphorus University ). at0 21:19, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This claim might not be true; according to the full text of the Surname Lawthat is unfortunately in Turkish, it is required that "the new surnames should be taken from the Turkish language" (II.5); and "names off foreign races and nations cannot be chosen surnames" (II.7). Sami Kohen (who is Jewish) and Avadis Hacinliyan's (who's Armenian) ancestors must have picked their surnames in 1934 as well, just as my ancestors had chosen my Jewish surname (Pinhas), who all were classified as religious minorities in regard to the Treaty of Lausanne. I did not run into any documents that mention any application of this law enforcing a selection from a list of "approved" Turkish names. As far as I have been told, the freedom of rejecting any selected surnames was given to the register officer, who most probably acted upon his instincts, not by a list. -leandros 19:04, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Law on last names

message: I am creating a draft page: talk:History of Turkey/Draft. I propose we use this page to create a replacement of the current article with the following points (feel free to add points to this list, but a better place to discuss changes to this draft would be that page's talk page):
* Comments about foundation of Republic of Turkey, in particular how it relates to Ottoman Empire and in what ways it is a continuation and in what ways it is not. Also very brief (maybe just a list) mentioning of previous states in Anatolia.
* After this justification, a summary of major events of Ottoman Empire marking its foundation, rise and fall. 
* Special emphasis (possibly with its own subsection) on WWI, since this is the beginning of the transformation. A brief account of all Ottoman fronts, in particular the Eastern front with a reference to Armenian Genocide article. The spirit of making this inclusion as part of WWI is not because it is part of WWI, but rather the time frame. As far as I could follow the discussions regarding this issue, it is undisputed that Armenian civilians were killed completely far from the front and hence these killings cannot be regarded as a natural part of the war. 
* Again special emphasis on Turkish War of Independence. As this is the second part of the transformation. In addition to war itself, a list treaties (at least Mondros, Sevres and Lausanne) and an outline of how Ankara separated from Sultan's government (congresses, parliament's foundation, Sultan's army etc.).
* Then the foundation of republic etc. etc., as there is no dispute on the rest I do not think there is a need to reach a consensus regarding those parts yet.
I am afraid our revert war will continue while we work on this draft. Before the article gets more detailed, a reference to Armenian Genocide article is not acceptable to me. It is certainly important, but it is not like I am listing that article for deletion, I simply want balance in this article. at0 02:52, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: A plan for further editing

message: I hereby withdraw from this discussion. I will not edit this article on controversial topics. I hope third party opinions will enrich and improve this article. Pushing your PoV is uncool. at0 03:54, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Withdrawal 

message: I came here from RfC. Does this page still have an active dispute? If so, can someone summarize it? Maurreen 16:01, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: RfC?

message: I must admit I am not very well versed in the above conflict, but it has been almost three months since this article was locked. Isn't it time to unlock it? /The Phoenix 20:07, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know. I have little confidence that the vandalism not start again. Perhaps another admin will.--Wiglaf 20:15, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's been locked since June and if the vandalism persists one could always relock it. I think we should give it a try. /The Phoenix 15:31, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Frankly, I can predict that nationalistic Turks will do their best to remove any mention of Armenians in the article, and that some Armenians will add things that will make certain Turks go ballistic. I did not lock the article, but I would not unlock it until another admin has had his say.--Wiglaf 21:19, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unlock? 

message: With all do respect, I am removing the "See Also- Armenian Genocide". This issue obviously lies in the history of The Ottoman Empire, and it should be referenced there. Please don't reply  "This is part of your history accept it! Accept it!" because that is not making any sense; there is a difference between the Empire and the Republic, at least there should be here, in an encyclopedia. This issue should of course be discussed, but referencing it under the Turkish Republic history is a npov. The page eventually links to Ottoman Empire, so the issue is not being evaded. Please show some respect and neutrality. hudd 06:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: the question is whether the history of the Ottoman Empire is unrelated to the history of the Republic of Turkey. I was surprised to find the scope of the article at this title begins in 1922. Maybe this should be a disambiguation page, pointing to History of the Republic of Turkey (this article), and History of Anatolia. If this article's scope strictly begins in 1922, of course the Armenian stuff will be offtopic here. We get a lot of "Troy is Turkish!" style edits over at Troy. You can draw a line at 1922, but you cannot embrace Troy and the Hittites as "Turkish" while holding that the Armenians were killed by those pesky Ottomans in ancient pre-Turkish times (1915). dab (ᛏ) 12:01, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genocide reference 

message: Excuse me but this article is nonsense. History of Turkey is the history of Turks in Asia Minor therefore it should start with Seljuk Turks. For before Seljuk Turks, the article can link to History of Anatolia. A History of Turkey series should be started. Seljuks, Ottomans and Modern Turkey are the fingers of the same hand.--Kagan the Barbarian 11:42, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, I think we should move this to History of the Republic of Turkey at this point and make "History of Turkey" a dab page for now. dab (ᛏ) 12:38, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Turkey