Talk:Armenian genocide/Archive 15

message: The lack of a public prosecution of the organizers behind Armenian Genocide by the Allied powers was said to have largely influenced nazi Germany's fascist leader Adolf Hitler.
Sure nazism is influenced by facism but I think it's missleading to use "NAZI Germanys FACIST leader", in my oppnion it should simply say nazi Germany's leader Adolf Hitler. --DerMeister 20:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. It's poorly written anyway, it doesn't make any sense - how would Hitler influence them not to persecute? And who said that? --AW 21:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, how about this version "It is said that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler was encouraged to commit genocide against the Jews because of the lack of any public prosecution for the organizers of the Armenian Genocide." or "It was said that the lack of public prosecution of the organizers of the Armenian genocide imfluenced Nazi leader Adolf Hitler decide to commit genocide against the Jews." I'm just trying to make it make sense, I am not making any judgement about the statement. It needs a source in any case. --AW 23:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds much better, I'll try to find it.--MarshallBagramyan 23:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strange sentence 

message: I think we should add this information in this article about the findings of mass graves in Eastern Turkey believed to date from the 1915 Armenian and Assyrian Genocides. http://www.aina.org/news/20061128104356.htm Also in Turkish http://www.kurdistan-post.com/News-file-article-sid-13065.html Also if Turkey claims there was no Genocide than why is the Turkish government trying to hide this finding and the military personnel forbade the villagers to tell anyone about the site and then they closed the site. Although this information was leaked Turkey pressed the villagers to give the names of those responsible for it.
:I read about this too.  To me, this incident isn't surprising and it's probably one of the more blatant examples of Armenian Genocide denial (like you said, if there was no genocide, then why is the Turkish government so concerned about these bones?) This news is important and should be posted on both this article and the article on Nisibis (Nusaybin). -- Clevelander 22:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think that AINA is a credible source. Besides excavated mass graves of Turks exist too, but no one has bothered to mention them[www.tbmm.gov.tr/yayinlar/yayin1/7-Konukcu(143-154).pdf Massacres of the Turks and mass graves]
--Hasanidin 02:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hasanidin you just told me my source is not credible and you gave me a source that is also not credible either for your claim. Fine if that source is not credible I can give you another source http://www.topix.net/forum/blogs/T319LCRCGEIVKNP17 or  or  ROOB323 03:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The accc.org.uk is Armenian controlled, whereas regnum.ru is a Russian nationalist website, which features as a top story in its Russian verision an article denying the Ukrainian Holodomor. I checked the news in Turkish newspapers though, and it seems that the Turkish newspaper Özgür Gündem has indeed reported on the discovery of some bones and it seems also that it has been suspended for 15 days after remarks by a Turkish general of it being the mouthpiece of the PKK as reported by Radikal . For now, I would refrain from any speculations on this apparent mass grave and await an investigation by experts. --Hasanidin 04:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the Turkish government closed off this site and told the villagers that found the site to remain silent. I really don't think there is any other way for experts to come and investigate this findings if the Turkish government is trying to keep silent regarding the finding, since this site was discovered on October 17, 2006 and kept secret until one of the villagers leaked the story. ROOB323 05:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: all news sources refer to a single newspaper here "Özgür gündem" the newspaper of the PKK terorist organisation. However if you could have read Turkish you would have seen that Kurdistan news tell the story quite different. stating that the villagers have found the grave while trying burry their death. and they covered the grave with stones. No mention of soldiers coming and closing the grave and warning people to remain silent. it is just said that villagers were asked to close the grave and not to do anything (obviously not to damage the site)and it is stated in the upcoming days the place will be investigated. this is simply a thing that any goverment will do. just two months ago Turk history society challenged Armenians to come and find the mass graves of Armenians in a joined effort. This has not hit the head lines of course. So it is unfair to give an impression as if Turkey is trying to hide something. Finding a mass grave is not surprising since many people were killed during that period. what is interesting is that suddenly Swedish foreign minister jumped into that. the history is repeating it self over and over. Turkish mass graves found in so many places are no news. yet a gossib about a possible Armenian/Christian mass grave moves the Sweden parliment so deeply.neurobio 09:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: If the Turkish government is not trying to hide anything than we will see if the Turkish government will respond to Insan Haklari Derneği (IHD), a Turkish organisation working with human rights issues, which has sent an open letter to the Turkish ministry of the interior demanding an investigation of the mass grave discovery, to answer if the mass graves that were found near Nusaybin has something to do with the Assyrian and Armenian genicides. By the way since the Turkish government kept quiet for a while after discovering this graves the only newspaper in Turkey that took pictures and reported about this findings they dug further into it and came into contact with professor David Gaunt at Södertörn University in Stockholm who has done a lot of research about the Assyrian genocide and the news about the mass finding was distributed by Tidningarnas Telegrambyrå (TT), Sweden's top news agency and was thereafter published in several Swedish media, including the two leading morning papers Dagens Nyheter (DN) and Svenska Dagbladet (Svd) this is why "moves the Sweden parliament so deeply" like you said. Also you claim there were "Turkish mass graves found in so many places" can you give me reliable sources for your claim? I want to see what your sources are from, when you accuse me of having a false source from a terrorist organization newspaper. ROOB323 22:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: To call these "scholarly documented" is a bit of a joke. I have read private reports from (non-Armenian or Turk) individuals who have examined much of this "evidence" and who have noted in some cases quite a bit of doctoring of what otherwise are likely Christian/Armenians to make it look as if they are Muslims. The same hold true for a number of artifats that are kept is supposed museums that depict Muslims slaughtered by Armenians. Much of this is very amaturish with obvious mitakes that in fact shows the opposite of what is being presented/portrayed. Again, I'm not claiming that there was none of this - Armenians killing innocent Turks. When Russians took over areas Russian Armenians, Cossacks, Russians and even Ottoman Armenian men who had fled the Genocide - did torch towns and villages and commit atrocities. And as sad as these criminal acts of war are - they still do not equate - in any respect - concerning government intent and policy and the totality and severity of the acts carried out against innocent woeman and children and such - the CUP directed program to annihilate its ethnic and religious minorities - of which the Armenians were first and formost on the list to be eliminated. Let us not forget that Assyrians and Greeks were similarly (later) treated to the same fate. Were Assyrians and Greeks likewise claimed to be collaborators with enemy forces commiting atrocities against Muslims? And even if there were some Assyrian and (Ottoman) Greek individuals or even forces that happened to join the Allies (such as Jews and Jewish units that joined the allies in WW2) do we then accept that the government directed and prosecuted genocides against these people never happened?--THOTH 15:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mass Graves Found In Eastern Turkey 

message: How about the POV in the pre-CUP history? The life of Ottoman second-class citizens was not nearly as repressive as the author makes it sound. Non-Muslim Ottomans could testify in religious court, but their testimony meant less.  Like, say, if there is a believer's word against an "infidel"'s word. Mind, this was only the state within the religious courts. These always dealt with the more domestic side of the law and, even in this capacity, tended to touch and less-and-less upon the regular legal proceedings within the empire throughout the modern era. Until the fervour of nationalism infected the decaying empire, the non-Muslim Ottoman was not more often spit on than doffed a hat to; the Non-Muslim Ottoman was granted rights to facilitate the practices of his or her own faith and, before the seizure of power by the CUP, Christians and Jews had enjoyed two generations of being priveleged enough to choose between serving in or paying into the army. Armenian Ottomans dominated European land trade in and out of the empire. Members of the Armenian populace could win, by their merits, the respect of their Muslim, Greek and Jewish neighbours.   
I would also like to add that citing a European travelogue to characterize the treatment of Christians in the Ottoman Empire can only cast doubt on the validity of your characterization, based, as it seems to be, on unqualified Orientalist pulp. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.81.123.57 (talk • contribs).
Well, still no change on this part of the article.  I dare not make an attempt because I know this is such a sensitive and highly controversial topic; my changes would probably not last a minute.  I just can't understand why people so jealously protect their status as victims.  I can imagine it must be hurtful when parties claim that your murdered ancestors were never murdered (or that they deserved what they got), but inaccurately painting the everyday treatment of non-Muslims in the Ottoman Empire does nothing to lift the veils from these eyes.  It must be that hateful philosophy, nationalism, that makes some Turks vehemently deny the CUP's crimes as if today's Turk would have to inherit the blame of the atrocities if they would admit the verity of them.  It must be an attempt to appease the dead that makes some Armenians wish to paint with such dark colours the daily lives of their ancestors.  I must repeat, Armenians did not live in constant danger, fear and disrespect from the time that the first Turcoman tribes trickled into their homeland until the establishment of an Armenian-Nation State.  We need to examine the purpose of such slander.  How does it help the debate between Turks and Armenians when we make it look like only non-Muslims were subject to the whims of the arbitrary and intrusive state?  Wasn't it the case that all Ottoman subjects were affected by the rare occasion that the Sublime Port managed to intrude into provincial matters?  Wasn't there ever any neighborliness between Muslim and non-Muslim Ottomans?  What purpose is served by ignoring the data which contradicts this British ethnographers and his friends in Wikiland?  If you care, check out Colin Imber, Donald Quataert or Mark Mazower and stop trying to stir up ghosts.  It hurts an impartial observer to watch this.  I say I'm impartial, but I am not alien to claims of victim hood.  I'm Irish, but you don't see me flinging red paint at today's English.  It has recently come to my attention that I may be allergic to wheat as a direct result of English prohibitions on my ancestors' diets!  This, at least, is a crime against my very person.  Unfortunately, none live today whom I can punish for the crime.  Admittedly, few would dare deny the crimes committed against my people (and I haven't heard any accusations of genocide leveled against my forebares), so you can say that I'm speaking from privilege.  All I can say in response is that no ghost is lain to rest when you greedily clutch at claims to victimhood from a position of willful denial.
=== Proposals for changes ===
Fad (ix) asked me to explain here the reasons behind my proposals for a significant modification of the paragraph.
The text which I endorse would go as follows:
:In principle, Armenians, like Greeks, Jews, and other Christian communities across the Middle East were originally subject to a corpus of laws and regulations which gave them a different legal status within the Empire than their Muslim counterparts. Armenians were barred from serving in the military (and instead forced to pay an exemption tax), their testimony in Islamic courts was inadmissible against Muslims, they were not allowed to bear weapons.
:In practice, the status of ethnic Armenians varied widely based upon geographical location and socio-economical conditions. Whereas ethnic Armenians might have been treated as second-class citizens in rural, conservative areas of Eastern Anatolia, others living in cities like Istanbul and Izmir were able to reach a considerably high status and even serve in the high ranks of the public administration. 
:During the Tanzimat period, a series of constitutional reforms provided a limited modernization of the Ottoman Empire. In 1856, the Hatt-ı Hümayun promised equality for all Ottoman citizens irrespective of their ethnicity and confession, widening the scope of the 1839 Hatt-ı Şerif of Gülhane. The reformist period peaked with the Constitution which was promulgated on 23 November 1876 and which established freedom of belief and equality of all citizens before the law.
:This constitution, however, was short-lived, since Sultan Abdülhamid II suspended the constitution on 13 February 1878, inaugurating a period of rather repressive and authoritarian rule over the Empire.
:The single event that possibly triggered the chain of events is most likely the Russian victory over the Ottoman Empire in the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–78. At the end of the war the Russians took control over a large portion of territory inhabited by ethnic Armenians but ceded much of it after the Treaty of Berlin was signed. The Russians claimed they were the supporters of Orthodox Christians within the Ottoman Empire. The weakening control of the Ottoman government over its empire in the following 15 years led many Armenians to believe that they could gain independence from it.
First paragraph: The current content is expressed in a more neutral way. A reference to alleged "heavy taxation" (which suggests an ethnic-based selective fiscal burden, while not providing figures and references) is deleted. You may want to check out on İNALCIK & QUATAERT, An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, 1300-1914, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994 or ZÜRCHER, Turkey: A Modern History, London, I B Tauris, 1993 to know more about fiscality in the Ottoman Empire.
Second paragraph: The sentence they were treated overall as second-class subjects is a subjective opinion that could spark endless debate. While it is fair to say that there was no "equality before the law" in the contemporary Western acception, I think that it should be mentioned that geographical and socio-economical parameters had a huge impact on the status de facto of Armenian individuals and communities. For Armenians serving in the Ottoman administration, see for example AKARLI, The Long Peace. Ottoman Lebanon, 1861-1920, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1993.
Deletion of Ramsay's quote: This passage must be put in the proper context. The cultural background of a 19th century English traveller might include a "propensity" (not to say bias) in favour of Christian populations which could include prejudices and sterotypes against Turks (and/or Muslims in general). If you read the autobiography of Helmuth von Moltke you can read a much more complex depiction of that society, even though again through the eyes of a European observer.
Third paragraph: These are historical facts expressed in a way that I assess fair and balanced. I think that adding these details gives a more correct explanation of what was going on at that time, instead than just writing (in a quite sloppy way) that Abdülhamid ruled as he saw fit.   
Fourth paragraph: There is a minor correction. Russia endorsed the rights of Orthodox Christians. 
I hope this offers a positive contribution. Your feedback will be welcome. FrancescoMazzucotelli 22:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have nothing to add, and will be endorsing it. You did all I asked. Fad (ix) 22:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The status of the Armenians in the Empire 

message: Fad (ix) asked me to explain here the reasons behind my proposals for a significant modification of the paragraph.
The text which I endorse would go as follows:
:In principle, Armenians, like Greeks, Jews, and other Christian communities across the Middle East were originally subject to a corpus of laws and regulations which gave them a different legal status within the Empire than their Muslim counterparts. Armenians were barred from serving in the military (and instead forced to pay an exemption tax), their testimony in Islamic courts was inadmissible against Muslims, they were not allowed to bear weapons.
:In practice, the status of ethnic Armenians varied widely based upon geographical location and socio-economical conditions. Whereas ethnic Armenians might have been treated as second-class citizens in rural, conservative areas of Eastern Anatolia, others living in cities like Istanbul and Izmir were able to reach a considerably high status and even serve in the high ranks of the public administration. 
:During the Tanzimat period, a series of constitutional reforms provided a limited modernization of the Ottoman Empire. In 1856, the Hatt-ı Hümayun promised equality for all Ottoman citizens irrespective of their ethnicity and confession, widening the scope of the 1839 Hatt-ı Şerif of Gülhane. The reformist period peaked with the Constitution which was promulgated on 23 November 1876 and which established freedom of belief and equality of all citizens before the law.
:This constitution, however, was short-lived, since Sultan Abdülhamid II suspended the constitution on 13 February 1878, inaugurating a period of rather repressive and authoritarian rule over the Empire.
:The single event that possibly triggered the chain of events is most likely the Russian victory over the Ottoman Empire in the Russo-Turkish War of 1877–78. At the end of the war the Russians took control over a large portion of territory inhabited by ethnic Armenians but ceded much of it after the Treaty of Berlin was signed. The Russians claimed they were the supporters of Orthodox Christians within the Ottoman Empire. The weakening control of the Ottoman government over its empire in the following 15 years led many Armenians to believe that they could gain independence from it.
First paragraph: The current content is expressed in a more neutral way. A reference to alleged "heavy taxation" (which suggests an ethnic-based selective fiscal burden, while not providing figures and references) is deleted. You may want to check out on İNALCIK & QUATAERT, An Economic and Social History of the Ottoman Empire, 1300-1914, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1994 or ZÜRCHER, Turkey: A Modern History, London, I B Tauris, 1993 to know more about fiscality in the Ottoman Empire.
Second paragraph: The sentence they were treated overall as second-class subjects is a subjective opinion that could spark endless debate. While it is fair to say that there was no "equality before the law" in the contemporary Western acception, I think that it should be mentioned that geographical and socio-economical parameters had a huge impact on the status de facto of Armenian individuals and communities. For Armenians serving in the Ottoman administration, see for example AKARLI, The Long Peace. Ottoman Lebanon, 1861-1920, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1993.
Deletion of Ramsay's quote: This passage must be put in the proper context. The cultural background of a 19th century English traveller might include a "propensity" (not to say bias) in favour of Christian populations which could include prejudices and sterotypes against Turks (and/or Muslims in general). If you read the autobiography of Helmuth von Moltke you can read a much more complex depiction of that society, even though again through the eyes of a European observer.
Third paragraph: These are historical facts expressed in a way that I assess fair and balanced. I think that adding these details gives a more correct explanation of what was going on at that time, instead than just writing (in a quite sloppy way) that Abdülhamid ruled as he saw fit.   
Fourth paragraph: There is a minor correction. Russia endorsed the rights of Orthodox Christians. 
I hope this offers a positive contribution. Your feedback will be welcome. FrancescoMazzucotelli 22:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have nothing to add, and will be endorsing it. You did all I asked. Fad (ix) 22:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposals for changes 

message: This article has more information than any of the other articles about the Special Organization or the other one. Can anybody fix those articles, and source this one? --AW 21:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In two days I will have few hours free in my hands, I will add those. Fad (ix) 01:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Special Organization (Teşkilat-ı Mahsusa) 

message: Guys, it is not my job to say that it did happen or it didn't happen, but I have a few problems with the style of te article. The word "deny" has a completely different meaning than the word "doesn't accept". I urge all wikipedians to change "deny"s to "doesn't accept"s and there is also some information on Wikipedia in Turkish. I hope that no one will not object when I translate those texts to English Wiki. Both sides have their right to express their solutions to the issue.Caglarkoca 21:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Turkish government denies the reality of the Armenian Genocide.  Period.  There's no reason to change the diction. Serouj 21:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the Turkish Wikipedia, you can reach the information that Armenia rejected the Turkish offer to make the government archives. Anyone can reach the Turkish archives from http://www.devletarsivleri.gov.tr/yayin/osmanli/o_b_ermeniler/obermeniler.htm Unfortunately the site is in Turkish. (of course it is Turkish archives) But I am willing to translate some texts from them if anyone wants to read them.Caglarkoca 22:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how that relates to Genocide denial by the Turkish government, and changing the diction of the word "deny." Serouj 22:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

text: It is well known, however, that the Ottoman archives remained closed for decades to Western scholars.  In the meantime, it is highly likely that the Turkish government took the time to sort through them and remove any evidence of the Armenian Genocide.  What else would explain keeping the archives closed to Western scholars for 85 years?  Cheers. Serouj 22:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

text: If you can find for us the proceedings of the Ottoman military tribunal which convicted the Young Turk triumvirate of crimes against humanity, that would be great!  Thanks.  Serouj 22:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Allright, I don't want to discuss whether it is happened or not. It is historians' job. I am an engineer, sorry:) Why are the armenian archives still closed? I am open to other points of information about translating Turkish Armenian Genocide to English and add it to wiki. You cannot just reject Turkish side.Caglarkoca 22:27, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. Which Armenian archives are you referring to? Genocide scholars continue to be denied access to the Ottoman archives. Serouj 22:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article which you offer is dated 1997 which means that it is out of date. Besides, can you find me a website which includes Armenian Archives as the Turkish archives webpage http://www.devletarsivleri.gov.tr/yayin/osmanli/o_b_ermeniler/obermeniler.htmCaglarkoca 22:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Correction.  Hilmar Kaiser was recently regranted access to the Ottoman archives, but important parts of it still remain closed; importantly, the Ottoman Ministry of the Interior's Directorate for Public Security, 2nd Department (Armenian Department). ref. Serouj 22:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Turkish archives are open since 1993. Hence the document that you are offering has no reliability. The date is taken from http://www.devletarsivleri.gov.tr/yayin/osmanli/o_b_ermeniler/sunus.htm. It is a governmental website.Caglarkoca 22:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That Dr. Hilmar Kaiser, a German archival historian and genocide scholar, has not been granted access to the archives of the Ottoman Ministry of the Interior's Directorate for Public Security, 2nd Department (Armenian Department) is a documented fact.  I don't understand Turkish, but maybe you can help here.  Does the site you are referencing include all the material from the Ottoman Ministry of the Interior's Directorate for Public Security, 2nd Department (Armenian Department)? Serouj 22:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for a worthy comment:) I am not sure whether it includes all archive, but the whole archive is open now. I cannot possibly provide you the link which tells that all archive is available due to the fact that the link given in the Turkish wiki doesn't work. I'll give you any necessary information from here. If you want to reach Turkish wiki http://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ermeni_Soyk%C4%B1r%C4%B1m%C4%B1. I will be busy with translating the page in a few days.Caglarkoca 22:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turkish Thesis 

message: On August 22, 1939 Adolf Hitler gave a speech outlining his plan for Lebensraum.  Lebensraum was Hitler's plan for wiping out the Jews and the Poles to create living space for his new Third Riech.  In this speech Hitler refers to a little known event that he calls the Annihilation of the Armenians.  Hitler pointed out that very few poeple and no governments recognize or even remember what happened to the Armenians during WWI.  Basically Hitler was using the Armenian Genocide as an example of what he would be able to get away with while dealing with the Jews of Europe.
206.78.245.35 16:55, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And your sources are? yandman 16:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In 1942 American author Louis Lochner published a book titled "What About Germany", my source comes from him.  His source comes from a transcript of the speech Hitler gave to the commanders of the Wehrmacht.  The third paragraph of the speech also hangs in the Holocaust Museum in Washington.  There is also a Wikipedia article dealing with this quotation.  See - Armenian Quote.206.78.245.35 20:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's the article. Armenian quote. it says it's in dispute. But 206.78.245.35, you should really sign up for a user name --AW 20:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Whether the Wikipedia article says so or not, the reason the quote is in dispute has to do with the fact that the Turks want to hide this embarrassing part of their history.  Western European governments as well as the US do not wish to upset the Turkish government or people because Turkey is new to the EU and NATO and serves as an important jumping off point for wars that are fought in the region (ie Iraq).  There is more to gain on all sides if the Armenian Genocide just goes away (thus the growing denial movement).  There is very little to gain in making up the Armenian Genocide as the world community - and the UN - doesn't really do anything about genocides as you can see from what's happening in Sudan and what has happened in Rwanda, Shri Lanka, Somalia, and many dozens of other places around the globe. (As for logging in, I'm brand new to Wikipedia and not very computer saavy and I really don't know how).206.78.245.35 22:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Not a single claim you make here is accurate or truthful. The truth is that the "Lochner" version of the Hitler speech(s)was known and accepted as the most thorough of the three versions (all from notes taken as there was no prepared text or such). The reason it was not used was that the portion of the speech that was useful to the nuremburg prosecuters concerned pre-meditation of the attack on and Hitler's plans against Poland and all of the documents contained the passages related to this. The prosecutors were aware of the aggressive cross examination and attempts b the defense to discredit documents and even though all were confident of the accuracy of the Lochner document (and have maintained this under oath) the issue had to do with the veracity of the chain of possesion of the documents. As the other two versions were taken directly from captured German Officers (at wars end) they were much more difficult to challenge then a version obtained much earlier (1939) through Lochner. Thus there was no need to enter into evidence a document that could cause delay or such from a defense challenge. And the "so-called" Andonian documents have never been proven to be forgeries. However they are difficult to verify as the originals of the documents have been lost. However, the primary content of the telegrams has been verified and corroborated through other sources - thus one can assume that these documents are in fact accurate as nothing in them has ever actually been contradicted and they conform with what is known from other sources. However, much like as with the "Lochner" version of Hitler's speech(s) the "Andonian" documents are unecessary as a proof of the Genocide as there exists a plethora of corroborated and sourced and clearly reliable data that prove the Armenian genocide with more then sufficient detail and confidence. 1.5 million figure for the Armenian genocide is at least as accurate as the 6 million figure for the Jewish Holocaust and both figures can be thought of similarly - as an approximate number useful to guage the size of the crime in terms of general numner of individuals killed. In each case whether the actual figure is somwhat more or somewhat less is immaterial. What is important is the utter devestation of the ethnic communitiy and the deliberate systamatic plan engaged to exterminate such. And what is also noteworth is how deniers of each genocide continually harp on these figures and attempt to dispute the accuracy of such as if this actually matters or changes anything. It doesen't. What it does is show the lengths that deniers will go and exposes the paucity of argument that they have to dispute the basic and known and important facts of the matter. And in this regard, as in most others, genocide deniers only show their true colors to the world.--THOTH 01:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: according to what I have read the document was rejected because some pages were changed by some one. Andonian documents are proven forgeries. No single scolar even your genocide scolars do not use these documets any more. Even good old deciever Dadrian.neurobio 21:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well you've heard wrong. I always find it funny that some Turks would even attempt to make the claim that there was a conspiracy during/just after WWII to link Hitler with the Armenian Genocide (claiming that thses statements were fabricated...by who? For what reason? There was absolutly no Armenian effort towards Genocide recognition at this time and no involvement of any Armenians in this besides - it is an absurd claim and bespeaks of Turkihs paranoia and desperation) And indeed these are not the only statements made by Hitler concerning the Turkish extermination of Armenians - there are several on record - this one is just the most famous. And again - no one has ever "proven" the so-called "Andonian" telegrams as forgories...based on what? - official Turkish scholorship??? please - are you trying to make a joke...I'm certainly laughing. And that you call Dadrian - the absolute most respect scholar on this issue a deciever is quite telling. --THOTH 05:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

text:  they are forged for robust and simple reason. 1. in one of the telegrams the person who sends the telegram was not working in that region at that time. 2. the guy who forged the telegram made another fatal eror by forgeting the time difference between regular calender and the callender used my muslims. 3. the paper style does not match the papers used in otoman communication and archives 4. the signatures are not real (doesnt match the real signature) as proven by forensic experts. 5. the real documents are not around no one has seen the originals but the copies. And dadriann is really respected. he was the chanpion on defending the andonian documents. Even the quote that you wrote made here citing the book "two commitees two massacres" is a distorted translatian and sipmly a scientific crime.neurobio 13:22, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All those issues have already been addressed in Dadrian's own paper which you comment when you haven't even read it. His paper about the Andonians could be found here.  So much goes of the said scientific crime. Fad (ix) 03:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Just out of curiosity, when you say the Armenians are reluctant to accept the truth, which truth are you refering to?  That the genocide did in fact happen, or that it did not. 206.78.245.35 23:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

text: the fact that Andonian documents are proven forgeries and still they are presented in your genocide museum. thats what I am talking about. It is rather strange to present totaly fake documents in your sacret monument. I dont expect any Armenian to say there is no genocide.neurobio 21:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

text:  I have no info about previous talks of hitler. Maybe you are right but it is just a meaningles debate in terms of proving a genocide. He serves just to gain sympathy Armenian cause and draw analogy between holocaust and Armenian issue.neurobio 21:06, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adolf Hitler 

message: I think it would be wise to place a lock on this article, such that only registered users may edit it, given the number of vandalisms we've had in the last day; I counted 16.  Thanks.  (Can the lock be made long-term?) Serouj 20:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Serouj, we need to lock this article. I think admins must place semi protection to this page. It is a sensitive issue and some people think that vandalism can solve it. Caglarkoca 22:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Khoikhoi 22:37, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lock Request 

message: Someone is trying to rewrite this as a translation of the article on the Turkish Wikipedia. Is there anyone who doesn't think this is a very bad idea? yandman 15:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This idea belongs to me. I am here to ask you why are you so stressed about translation?  It might seem as a bad idea to you, but anyone using wikipedia has the right to learn about the Turkish Thesis as well. Such an attempt will not violate WP:NPOV#Undue weight and is in fully accordance with WP:NPOV Caglarkoca 16:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

text: This article is part of WikiProject Turkey so such changes are essential to Wikipedia. Thanks. Caglarkoca 16:46, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

text: We already have a section called "Denial" in the article, and we point to the main article Denial of the Armenian Genocide.  That type of information would belong in the latter article.  On a related note, Caglarkoca, have you thought about making the reverse translation as well?  (That is, taking information from the English language Wikipedia article on the Armenian Genocide and transferring it over to the Turkish one, which seems awfully short to me compared to the English one.) Serouj 21:20, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New contributions 

message: Do not post messages that have nothing to do with the content of the article nor improvements that can be made. Any such messages can be removed per Wiki policies. This is not a personal forum, nor does it belong to anyone except the Wikipedia Foundation. If you would like to post personal messages, use e-mail, MSN or create your own website. Baristarim 23:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Serouj, your comments were rather uncivil, and directed at a user who doesn't seem to be acting in bad faith. His message was rather unpleasant (and a bit silly), I agree, but then again english clearly isn't his mother tongue, and he's new, so it's mean to lash out like that. However, Baris, I wouldn't remove them, as it could be argued that they're relevant to the underlying content dispute here: That Cagaloka believes... Well, you know the story. If Serouj would retract his comments, that would be nice. If not, tant pis. Come on people, let's not get bogged down in this again, or else I'm going to go and flame the people on Talk: France for invading us back in 1066... yandman 08:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Caglarkoca may be acting in good faith.  I don't want to remove my comment, because I think it addresses and puts into perspective where the word "vandalism" should really be used when talking about this subject.  Lashing out at a newbie was not right; it was an impulsive and emotional response on my part, given my family's involvement in this matter — just being human.  Caglarkoca, please continue on with the translation, and let the group know when it's ready.  Thanks.  Serouj 11:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, I also apologize if I kinda jumped in there, but there have been too many instances of such conversations getting out of hand. The problem is not the posts themselves actually, but really the only thing that worries me is that when such conversations get out of hand, it contributes to the creation of a hostile working environment (even more than usual :)) I tried to contact caglarkoca to try to explain him that if he wanted he might rather want to get involved in less "hot" articles until he has understood the atmosphere in Wiki English. Cheers! Baristarim 12:38, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irrelevant posts 

message: OK, I've read the translation, it is an end by itself, not what I have hopped, I have contacted Garnet as I don't see who else I could contact about it and I ask Caglarkoca to work with Garnet on this issue. Maybe Baristarim is interested too. Fad (ix) 02:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just an indicator, starting with the foreign ministry site, Kamuran Gurun etc., would be a good start. Fad (ix) 02:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is much to translate, and I will continue translating. But I am not a native speaker, so it will need a review for grammer mistakes and minor corrections. I will ask baristarim to help me when I finish it. Thanks Caglarkoca 12:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Turkish government section 

message: The grammar in this article is shocking, "repeatedly referred to their destruction numerous times" is clearly redundent and exists is used twice in following scentences in the next paragraph...just two examples —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.109.208.68 (talk) 10:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar 

message: Warning - Edit war in progress - at least cite something boys and girls rather than this juvenile stick throwing. Pedro1999a |  Talk   21:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whooa !! 29th December 2006 

message: Feel free to comment on the arbitration case. --Cat out 21:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Armenian_Genocide]] 

message: OK. I hope that this username is not as spammy as the latter. So, why have the external links disapeared? I see this as rather a lack of knowledge among the editors than anything else. Just because certain people are not well informed about this topic (or deny it) does not justify censurship of this kind. Our site, among those external links deleted, contain professional educational and informative data, video and material and I can not see why educational information such as a video of a lecture conference is not relevant in this area.
Furthermore I can not see why ths topic is often locked. Terrorising the topic should not result in locking it for editing. Whether the information added is biased or not can be discussed, but never the less the discussion must go on. And bare in mind: the Armenian genocide might be a political controversy but it is a historical fact. The main deniers are the Turkish offical side. The rest are mostly Jewish historians who are either functionalists themselves (regarding the Jewish genocide) or are singulaists (also regarding the Jewish genocide). So please do not mix these two issues together and keep on to the facts.
BR,
Vahagn Avedian
Editor of Armenica.org
History student at Historical Institute of Uppsala University, Sweden —The preceding unsigned comment was added by VahagnAvedian (talk • contribs).
First of all see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You should refrain from adding the link yourself. Secondly see WP:External links. External links should be added if they can further enlighten the subject for points not covered in the article, and external links shouldn't duplicate information. This is the most important part: if there is one site that covers the content of five other links, then there is no need for those other five. I don't know about the specifics of this particular site, but the content of most of the external links already listed cover that site it seems. I don't know about the links present in other articles however. Cheers! Baristarim 14:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are mistakes in the above, such as Functionalists and Intentionalists. But this is irrelevent, I have checked the site and it is full of personal opinions, I don't think this issue is only of self promossion. We had problems in the past with personal sites, and I wish your site not be there. Raffi wiki encyclpedia shall remain an exception for materials such as picture that site provide. The only worth your site could have, it is the interviews by Akçcam and Dadrian. But did you took permission to load them? The interviews could go in the media section, but your site as an overall can not be presented as source for the article, and another editor shall do what is best and you shall remain out of that. That you add your true name and don't hide under a proxy is good, but not enough. Fad (ix) 17:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of external links and locking 

message: PanArmenian.net reports that North Dakota has proclaimed April 24 as Remembrance Day for the Victims of the Armenian Genocide. If this is true, could someone fix this map to add North Dakota when the page is unlocked? - Fedayee 18:28, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: PanArmenian.net is not a credible source, we need another source to confirm that information. Fad (ix) 21:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Theres another website confirming http://www.anca.org/press_releases/press_releases.php?prid=572 ROOB323 22:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  North Dakota 

message: Moved to /Arguments subpage. Talk page comments are supposed to be about the article, not the subject in general. Khoikhoi 10:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  There Was No Genocide (....of Turks) 

message: The same old I see.. Well, on a sidenote (in fact, this should be the main note, but hey), has any progress been made to resolve the content dispute that led to this article's protection? I think that its mention kinda got lost somewhere above :) Baristarim 10:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the article should be kept under semi-protection. It is a sad fact that there are many people waiting to vandalize the page. Caglarkoca 16:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article has been in semi-protection pretty much all the time for months :) However, there was a specific dispute about the structure of the article that was raised, and it led to an edit-war and to full-protection. I wasn't following what was happening, so I am just curious as to what the dispute was. Baristarim 17:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute 

message: I hate to sound like a prick by insisting on this, but has anyone have something to say about what I wrote above in the section "Dispute"? What was the dispute about that led to this article's protection? If it could be talked about, at least there could be the (small) possibility that there might be (a bit) less edit-wars in the future. Baristarim 16:16, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know specifically the answer to your question - however I think it may have had something to do with the continued efforts on the part of some (vandals) to present the (so-called) "Turkish position" (which is clearly a minority position not held by the vast majority of scholars nor supported by sufficient evidence)that denies that the Armenian Genocide was/is indeed a genocide. As long as such vandals continue to push this idea objecting to characterizing the Armenian Genocide as a genocide - contrary to all eveidence (that has been repeatedly presented here in the talk pages) then I fear this article will always need some sort of protection. However, if the article is specifically labeled as "disputed" because of the notion that the genocide itself is (legitimatly) disputed - then I would agree that this is not proper.--THOTH 18:46, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm.. I was thinking that it might have had to with the structure of the article, and the timeline of the events + a/the section about the status of the Armenians in the Empire before the WWI. The thing is, the reverts and additions were so complex that I am not able to figure out from the article's history what exactly the dispute was. It just seems that there were some additions, blind reverts, some shouting along the way and a protection by an administrator :) If it were some simple addition I wouldn't have asked.. I was just curious... Baristarim 19:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Baristarim I'm sorry but I don't know the answer to your question. I am however enjoying the manner in which you are asking it....--THOTH 20:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  We need some humor from time to time :) Well, I don't think you were here at that particular time when there was that edit-war, and I was only watching from a distance, so I am just trying to understand what was happening and what could be done. But no worries, I am sure the editors involved will expand further later on.. Baristarim 21:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dispute 2 

message: The caption under the photo of the telegram sent to the 'State Department' should state that it is the United States State Department.  This is an international encyclopaedia - it may be apparent to US readers what the State Dept is, but its not necessarily clear to those from other countries. 86.136.27.193 12:19, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A little point 

message: I'd already watched the pictures of this genocid in a very famous and old church in Isfahan/Iran and as far as I know Iranians and Armenians have lots in common and during this awful historical events many armenian came to Iran and they have always been treated with respect and also every year they demonstrate to protest against Turkey in Iran,Why haven't been written anything about it? 
fo more information you can also refer to :http://www.ourararat.com/eng/e_jamal.htm
thanks
This is amongst the events and incidents which demonstrate a need for another segment in the article, "The Ongoing Struggle" or "Ongoing Saga".  Obviously, this matter did not end in 1915.  Please see to it that more current events are included, from the 1960s on to current day? It should be less controversial, as there are modern accountings and news articles to go by. Thank you!
P.S. Dunno where the error is coming from.  This is the SECOND time I've posted the EditProtected to the FOLLOWING article, only to have it attached to this one in error.  Please see the following piece, about the journalist who was just killed, and create changes based on THAT article?  THANK YOU --JT 17:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're going to start adding current events into this page from the 1960s onward, then you'll also have to mention the Armenian terrorists (ASALA) who murdered nearly 50 Turkish diplomats and their families in the 1970s/1980s in the name of genocide recognition. Lima6 17:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that any info needs to be added will be added when it becomes unprotected. It involves somewhat a delicate addition, and its place and wording needs to be decided following the wikiprocess, which means many editors will need to have the possibility to edit continously until a compromise and concensus version will be born. Until then, any unilateral addition which would leave the other editors without the ability to edit will be unfair. Just wait until the page becomes unprotected - besides, there are some disputes about structure that (still) needs to be ironed out.. Baristarim 17:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I totally disagree with JT, recent events which would include both the actions of ASALA and the crimes committed in Turkey, do not belong to this article. I agree that wikipedia must have them in one way or the other, but Armenian Genocide article is completely devoted on the alleged genocide of 1915. Such material could be presented in an article called "Turkish-Armenian Relationships", in order to include both ASALA and other actions. It is also unethical to edit a page which is under protection. Thanks Caglarkoca 09:14, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is an article covering events after 1917 which includes ASALA. Those events should be included on that article. Fad (ix) 17:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which article is it? If we have such an article, there is no need to insert those events here. Loss of Hrant Dink would go there. Thanks Caglarkoca 23:01, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I also stress on the edit done in this protected page (of course by an admin). It is totally unethical. Caglarkoca 23:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Is it also forbidden in Wikipedia, just like it is in France and Switzerland, to say that the alleged genocide hadn't happened? Is it also against laws of wikipedia to state that TRNC exists? You have inserted the link to there. It doesn't matter whether your edit is minor or major. That page was under protection that means that the page is not to be edited. Moreover, have ever claimed that I have a great knowledge on the issue? No, I don't I speak of the format, rather than the information. Do I have many mainspace edits in English wiki? No, I express my opinions in the talk pages. (I have translations from English to Turkish wiki) So why are you trying to insult me due to my opinions on the alleged genocide and cyprus? It is clear you don't know much about the Cyprus, i.e Atlilar Massacre which was the main reason of Turkish interference to the island. Or you don't know EOKA. I just write cyprus because you brought it here even though it is not relevant. I don't have anything else to say someone like you. Caglarkoca 09:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please accept my sympathy 

message: I would like to add the summary of this event to the current status of the Armenian people.  The intent isn't to enflame, but to chronical and recognize that the passions are still high enough to commit murder, even today.  
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/20/world/europe/20turkey.html_r=1&th=&oref=slogin&emc=th&pagewanted=print
PS: I just tried the link and find it isn't working properly as pasted here, so you will find the contents of the NY Times article at the end of this article.  It remains their property and is NOT to be pasted into the article in its entirety, though it is lawful to summarize, paraphrase, etc., to convey the event.
As an aside, the way that this article and forum goes demonstrates exactly the way/nature/problem with this situation.  The Turks continue to attempt to deny, just as does the Turkish government.  ven those of us with both bloods in our veins are willing to admit, as does the rets of the world, that the genocide attempt occurred.  Yet there are the handful who would deny even those facts.  Why they feel compulsion to obsfucate the facts today, when they themselves could not be held culpable, is beyond me. Yet here is their record, chronicled on these pages and now in the real world newspapers, proof that they are willing to kill over it.  Gratefully, there remain men such as this one:
"A bullet was fired at freedom of thought and democratic life in Turkey. Once again, dark hands have chosen our country and spilled blood in Istanbul to achieve their dark goals."
RECEP TAYYIP ERDOGAN, Turkey’s prime minister, on the killing of an outspoken newspaper editor.
Please, Staff, facilitate the addition of this important event, that it isn't forgotten or swept under the carpet as another Armenian "myth".  Thank you!  --JT 16:48, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: NYTimes Article Removed. Sorry, but (as far as I know) just because this is a talk page, it doesn't mean it can ignore the law... yandman 09:20, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A link to the article should be okay.--213.46.128.161 20:16, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I tried to reply above to the inappropriateness of such an addition when the full-protection is in place.. Baristarim 17:36, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

text: The question is not about the content, but editorial encyclopedic spirit: when an article is protected, it is not fair when an addition can be made by an editor and not the others - this goes for any article, not just this one. It will be unprotected - it is against Wikipedia policy to protect articles for more than a couple of weeks. There was a particular structural dispute that led to its protection and it should come out of protection soon enough. Many articles get protected from time to time in Wiki, and the normal editing process resumes when they become unprotected. Cheers! Baristarim 23:07, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Outspoken Armenian/Turkish Journalist assasinated 

message: I have removed the section "Evidence against Armenian Genocide" . It was pov, original research and unreferenced. If any editor feels that part of the information needs to be put back in, it should be done in a neutral way, in the proper section and, most importantly, with references. AecisBravado 01:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good call. Wasn't sure to laugh or cry reading that section of supposed "evidence". I suspect it was lifted from some Turkish child's requirred primary school paper denying the Armenian Genocide. Every line in that section is completley without merit - quite embarrasing really - but very typical of the low quality and unsupportablility of Turkish denial.--THOTH 04:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Note that the user in question, , has now created the pov fork Evidence against Armenian Genocide. AecisBravado 13:50, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Moved to AfD so as to follow the procedure correctly. Follow the link to give your opinion. yandman 13:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section removed 

message: I ask to add these website links to External Links section of the article:
http://www.armenian-genocide.org
http://www.theforgotten.org
http://egern.net (language: Armenian and English)
http://genocide.ru (language: Russian)
Egern.net 10:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add some Armenian Genocide related websites to External Links 

message: I think it would be nice to add the following recently debuted documentary films to the "Art" section:
#The Genocide in Me by Informaction Films Inc. and Araz Artinian Productions (2005)
#Screamers (2006)
Thanks.  Serouj 23:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Add: New documentary films on the Armenian Genocide 

message: Is it really indiscriminate of gender? Esat Cemiloğlu, the eye-witness of the events gave a letter to Naci Kutlay. In the letter, he said:
"Artık kafile başlamıştır. Sivas'tan, Erzincan'dan, Elaziz'den getirilen genç kız ve kadınları kapatma olarak alırlar. M. Ünal'ın babası Asım Efendi bunlardan birini almak ister. Kız yüzüne tükürür ve ‘benim bütün akrabalarım ölürken ben senin keyfini yerine getirmem' der ve kendini nehre atar" 
"They took the girls and women from Sivas, Erzincan,and Elaziz as wives(kapatma). Father of M. Ünal, Asım Efendi wanted to marry one of them. The girl says "I cannot make you happy when all my relatives are dying" and throws herself to the river." 
This shows that the Kurds forces some Armenian girls to marry them instead of killing them like their relatives. Kavas (talk) 13:56, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Indiscriminate as in, they killed both men and women.  The fact that some were forced to marry doesn't change the fact that both men and women were targeted. Zeusu|c 18:30, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  indiscriminate of gender