Talk:Turkish people/Archive 1

message: Hi everybody! I recently discovered that there was no entry for ethnic Turks (as opposed to citizens of Republic of Turkey or speakers of the Turkish language or of all the Turkic languages combined), so I created one along the lines of the other ethnic group articles. But it needs a lot of help to conform the the standard of the other articles. //Big Adamsky 05:25, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, what a total difference since yesterday - looks really thorough and professional, User:70.122.73.105! 8-] //Big Adamsky 19:19, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  comment 

message: What do the harems have to do with the Turkish people? It is not as if a significant part of the Turkish population is descended from the harems. It just sounds like people who have a dislike for Turks are posting irrevelent information just to remind people of the negative aspects of Ottoman Turkey.DivineIntervention 21:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hi I would like the anti-Turkish bias removed from this article

message: When I made the edits and put in the data on the Turkish population, I listed what sources I used.  I used German census information, the article on Bulgarian Turks, Ethnologue, etc. Obviously,the number greatly varied and the information at Ethnologue was very dated, but it did point me in the right direction as to which countries have large Turkish populations.  If whoever wants to make changes and make them stick, it might help to say where you are getting your figures. The Bulgarian numbers might be low given the nature of Turkish-Bulgarian ethnic relations in the country since the attempts at Slavicizing the Turks is still a bitter memory in recent times, but whatever other information is attained has to explained I'd say. Tombseye 19:44, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just noted the edits by 85.97.17.88 and have to comment. The information doesn't discern the Kurdish and Turkish populations it seems. It simply relates Turkish citizens which can mean that they are either Kurds or Turks. I know for a fact, that a high percentage of 'Turks' in Germany for example are actually of Kurdish background as I lived there for 7 years. At any rate, the sources isn't all that great, but some of the information might be useful and could be incorporated to some extent as in some cases it might be accurate. Although, the numbers state that over 3.5 million live abroad, while the number in Turkey is well below 60, so where does the 67 million figure come from?  Tombseye 00:27, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Tombseye, the author needs to give the proof and the source for the sentence "While perhaps less than one-third of those who self-identify as ethnic Turks." Who originally claimed this and what methods were used to come up with this number? The burden of proof is not on the dissenters it is on who claims this.AverageTurkishJoe 17:29, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: It might help with the Demographics 'war' if dissenters gave their sources

message: Bulgarians oppressed more than 3 million turks in Bulgaria and forecefully bulgarized them, now the number of turks in Bulgaria is 12% from 50% 
http://www.ingilish.com/turksofbulgaria.htm
:Most of the Turks weren't Bulgarized, they were forced to emigrate back to Turkey according to the link you posted. It doesn't say anywhere in the article that half the population of Bulgaria was Turkish at any point. In fact, the article says that the majority of "turks" in Bulgaria were in fact "turkified Bulgarians", including the majority of those who emigrated to Turkey after the first world war. Epf 08:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turks in Bulgaria 

message: Could the significant populations be split out of the infobox into a separate table like Kurdish people? Or could the language etc. be put above the significant populations bit? - FrancisTyers 01:07, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, most ethnic groups follow the format that the Turks article does, such as Russians, French people, and Romanians. --Khoikhoi 01:18, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, you are right, perhaps the Kurdish people article should be adjusted accordingly. I still think that significant populations should be at the bottom of the infobox though... Perhaps I'll bring it up on the template talk page. - FrancisTyers 01:24, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: Hi !
I was reading the article. I am confused of who the Turks are. Author said that Aremians, Greeks, and Kurds live in Turkey. Hımmm, If there would be no Turks living in Turkey, why would we call Turkey for the country ? Should we call something else for it ?
:No, the article states that before Turkic tribes arrived there were Greeks, Armenians, and Kurds in Anatolia. This is historically accurate. Genetic tests have shown that most Turks are related to the people around them and the PRELIMINARY conclusion would be that most Turks are descendents of converts to Islam who adopted the Turkish language from a group that was quite mixed when it arrived anyway. This does not mean there are no Turks. Turks are a people today and well defined. This is only an explanation of their ancestry as a whole. Hope this helps to clarify things. Tombseye 18:58, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who are Turks ? 

message: What do the harems have to do with the Turkish people? It is not as if a significant part of the Turkish population is descended from the harems.It just sounds like people who have a dislike for Turks are posting irrevelent information just to remind people of the negative aspects of Ottoman Turkey. DivineIntervention 21:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello. Your edits are mainly good ones. I made some minor adjustments and it is actually correct to state that when we say Greek it should be clear that these were mainly Hellenized Anatolian peoples such as remnants of Hittites, Phrygians etc. The Armenian and Kurdish groups were probably small regional peoples in the east as well when the Turks arrived. Overall, I saw nothing wrong with your edits and I think this kind of collective working together helps the article.  Thanks. Tombseye 20:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hi I would like the anti-Turkish bias removed from this article

message: * Eliezer
* Pgk 
* Sam_Korn
* Mrent 
* Can't sleep, clown will eat me
:When Khoi is blocked by admins, he writes messages to his friends. If you look at these users pages, you will see that 
:: Do me a favor and change the article. If I do it, I will be probably blocked.
--hybrid lily 18:09, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I actually have never left any comments on any of those users talk page's. See for yourself. --Khoikhoi 21:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  of course you deleted all the evidences. I saw it with my own eyes. --85.99.147.107 22:24, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The last is much more better than the previous one. Now, I want to add more pictures which contains more than 4 pictures and Orhan Pamuk' on the page. If is it OK, I will do it 
--85.99.147.107 23:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

text: That makes even less sense. Russian Jews are not all Khazars first of all and secondly, what research are you talking about? Her name and her father's profession are mentioned in various books about her and I'm the only one referencing any of it. Tombseye 00:01, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

text: Who is this everybody? I'd like to know. What's your source? Your contentions contradict everything about her including her Ukrainian origins. Aside from the Bulgarians reference you have yet to offer up any reliable references to anything except your own opinion, which given your track record, hasn't been all that reliable. Getting personal again are we? You realize you broke the 3 revert rule? How unfortunate for you. Tombseye 00:12, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Kokikoki's Watchdogs