Talk:Occupation of the Ottoman Bank

message: The article is worded in a biased way. I'm going to clean it up so that it conforms to a more neutral point of view. Augustgrahl
*
I heard somewhere that Ottoman Bank was funded by England. Could you please take a look at it?
*
"They were subjected to heavy taxes and were downgraded as a separate group of Ottoman society, called a millet." 
Do you have any idea what 'millet' means? It means 'society' and it is heavily used in Turkish language.
This entire paragraph uses one book as a source, Burning Tigris by Balakian. If you read this sample paragraph, many other articles about Ottoman Armenians are based on the same "source" anyway, you will see how biased this source is. I am not saying that massacres did not take place but I don't think the sultan himself instructed the mobs to go and kill. Slaughtered thousands of Armanians living in the city, he says, i wonder how many Armenians were living in Istanbul back then and "thousands" were killed. If you think by the logic of this writer, by 1915, there shouldn't have been any Armenians on the face of the earth. What I am trying to say is that these articles should be written by professionals, not by the general public and that more unbiased sources should be used.--216.165.95.79 (talk) 21:36, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: I agree that the Background paragraph is worded poorly and distracts from the content with its leading language. On the Culture of the Ottoman Empire page, millets are discussed as a sort of solution to a widespread territory with disparate ethnic and religious groups that eventually gave way to an enrichment of culture and the cosmopolitan nature of the Ottomans, yet in this article millets "downgrade separate groups" (also that seems like pretty clunky English to me). Phrases like "defend their basic rights," "infuriated the Sultan," and "small resistance" make this read more like an op-ed than an encyclopedic article. I understand that this is a pretty incendiary topic so I'd really appreciate some other input on this, perhaps from the original author. If there is a historical consensus I'm not aware of that calls for such Manichean language to be used, then so be it. Otherwise, like I said, it's distracting and misleading. Icetitan17 (talk) 19:40, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Background paragraph

message: If you think that the article is biased or inaccurate, please discuss why. Leaving comments that are disparaging of certain ethnic groups can be seen as vandalism and will be deleted accordingly. So, if you believe that this article needs attention, please bring it up in a more appropriate, productive manner. -- Augustgrahl 23:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: To "85.107.68.118"

message: Mustapha Akalp, please show me a non-partial source that calls the 1896 Ottoman Bank Takeover an act of terrorism. -- Davo88 14:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From Wikipedia:Words to avoid#Terrorist, terrorism:
Encyclopedic:
* X is on the U.S. Department of State's "Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations" list. 
* X, identified by the Y government as responsible for the Z suicide bombings [or "who claimed responsibility for the Z suicide bombings"], is classified as a terrorist group by A, B and C [countries or bodies].
* Countries A, B and C regard X as a terrorist group [because...]
Not encyclopedic: 
* X is a terrorist group.
* Y, leader of the X terrorists, ...
* After a rapid military response, the X terrorists abandoned the hostages.
Anyway that Category is up for deletion too. - Fedayee 18:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorism? 

message: A massacre of Armenians took place in the town of Egin, because it was the birthplace of Papken Siuni. Something should be mentioned of that fact, if someone has accurate details of the casualties and dates. Meowy 03:40, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done - Fedayee (talk) 04:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. BTW, I've changed the word "city" to "town" where you used it to describe Egin - it was never big enough to be called a city. Meowy 22:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aftermath 

message: This article is a disgrace.  Blatant ethnic propaganda.  Glorifying a banal terrorist act.  Then they wonder loudly why Ottomans were so mean to them!  This is comical and so transparent.  Capacity of these people for self-delusion never ceases to amaze me.  This the original terrorist act, it inspired 100 yrs of terrorism, that is their contribution to human race.  Look how proud!  --Murat (talk) 03:22, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No worse than your hate driven rhetoric! Try reading Wikipedia:Words to avoid. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid#Extremist.2C_terrorist_or_freedom_fighter.3F , specifically. --Kansas Bear (talk) 05:58, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda undisguised 

message: "1896 Ottoman Bank Takeover" is very misleading, it suggests some sort of corporate merger! "1896 Ottoman Bank seizure" would be better, but is still suggestive of some sort of economic or business incident. How about "1896 Ottoman Bank capture" (that is the wording used by Dadrian in his "History of the Armenian Genocide") or "1895 Ottoman Bank occupation" or "1896 Ottoman Bank siege"? Meowy 15:49, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  A title change is needed 

message: The incident is described as a terrorist attack here  
The London magazine:
In 1896 a bank robbery attempt in Constantinople by an armed Armenian terrorist gang...--193.140.194.102 (talk) 19:52, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The first source is referring to an event which took place in the Palestine mandate in 1946 so I don't think it will work as a source for this article....The second source is just a general book on terrorism. Whatever the case, the words "terrorist" and "terrorism" are words we generally try to avoid on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (words to watch).--Marshal Bagramyan (talk) 19:59, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok changed first one. Terrorism by Hunchak and Dashnaks were one of the first examples of modern terrorism. It is important to keep the word terroism in this aricle.--193.140.194.102 (talk) 20:13, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorist attack 

message: *1896 "Ottoman Bank Takeover" -Llc 3 results
*1896 "capture of the Ottoman Bank" -Llc 9 results
*1896 "seizure of the Ottoman Bank" -Llc 50 results
*1896 "occupation of the Ottoman Bank" -Llc 39 results
*1896 "raid on the Ottoman Bank" -Llc 28 results
*1896 "Incident of the Ottoman Bank" -Llc 1 result
*1896 "Ottoman Bank incident" -Llc 7 results
*1896 "Affair of the Ottoman Bank" -Llc 2 results
*1896 "Ottoman Bank affair" -Llc  3 results
Takabeg (talk) 22:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 29 March 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant 
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 04:54, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Arf logo.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: The attack is surely a terrorist act. There is no doubt civilians and innocent people died. How can it be a takeover? The guys attack the state bank.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.240.2.161 (talk) 10:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is another example that shows us what happens when some groups takeover Wikipedia. Totally corrupting it's original goal. As long as Wikipedia doesn't stop these idiots, its downfall will come soon.Chonanh (talk) 21:49, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: When does terrorism called takeover?

message: Quoted from the article: "Throughout the ordeal the personnel of the bank were treated well and were told that they were not robbers, were not looking to harm them, and did not want to rob the bank's money. They clarified that their goal was to simply dictate their political demands to the Ottoman and European governments. Nothing was stolen from the vault." Unbelievable! It's as if these people were not terrorists, but good samaritans who walked into the bank to make deposits!  This article is a shame for the entire lot of Wikipedia.  Todd (talk) 20:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Biased article