Talk:Greek Muslims

message: No merge: there is a need for a cover term for Greek speaking Muslims who are and are not Pontian. Opoudjis 01:15, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Greek-speaking Muslims → Greek Muslims — The current title is a pleonasm, really. While it is accurate and highlights the fact that very few of these people (and probably none in Turkey), espouse a Greek national identity, they are more often referred to as Greek Muslims, and the Greek Muslims which form part of the Muslim minority in Greece are also referred to as Greek Muslims in Greece, e.g. in this quote from Eleftherotypia : Greek Muslims, Pomaks and Muslims of Turkish origin and national consciousness live in Greece after all. I think that as we have an article on Macedonian Muslims (despite the fact that many of these people, and almost all of them in Albania, espouse an Albanian or other non-ethnic Macedonian national identity), I think that this move should be performed. This move does not risk confusion with the article on the Muslim minority in Greece (which the government accepts is multiethnic ) - I have proposed a move on the talk page of that article as well (see Talk:Greek Muslim minority) - and if any ambiguity occurs in this inherently ambiguous area, it can resolved with a disambiguation note. Finally, a Google test seems to show that this name is more common even for the Greek-speaking Muslims in Turkey  . --Tēlex 19:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~''
*Support --Tēlex 19:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could still do with splitting out into sections — if you insist as keeping it as one page :) - FrancisTyers · 10:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll see what I can do. --Tēlex 10:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Add any additional comments
I don't know, honestly, and I'm not even certain that Macedonian Muslims was a brilliant idea, even if I appreciate the simplicity of the solution you propose. Also, giving a look to scholarship through Google Print, I noted that "Greek muslims" (or "Muslim Greeks") is simply always used for the Greek muslim minority, and never for "Greek-speaking Muslims". The latter instead seems to be used in scholarship .--Aldux 00:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

text: "Muslim Greeks" is also widely used for the Greek-speaking Muslims in Turkey , it's just that technically, Greek Muslims is the term used by Greeks (Έλληνες Μουσουλμάνοι) and Turks (Yunan Müslümanları). Also, if you check a few of those results, they are referring to the Greek-speaking Muslims, e.g.  and  (which distinguishes between Greek Muslims and non-Greek Muslims in Turkey). Also, technically, Greek-speaking Muslims may be inaccurate, because the so-called Greek-speaking Muslims in Greece and Turkey are bilingual in Greek and Turkish (as are the Turks in Greece), and the only distinction is what is used as a home language. Other groups such as Pomaks and Roma have their own languages in addition to Greek and Turkish, although strictly only Turkish is ever used in worship. As I said, it will be ambiguous, and that's why a disambiguation note will be necessary: Greek Muslims (in the sense of Greek-speaking Muslims) only form part of the Greek Muslim minority (who are also sometimes referred to as Greek Muslims). The term Greek speaking Muslims in never used in Greece or for the Greek-speaking Muslim in Greece, whereas Greek Muslims can be used for the Greek-speaking Muslim in Turkey. --Tēlex 12:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  We don't use any wording like "Yunan Müslümanları" (Greek Muslims) in Turkish at all.  We call the Turks in Greece as "Batı Trakya Türkleri" (Western Thrace Turks).  I beg you please let's not go into another fight on these things.  --Gokhan 16:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not talking about the Turks of Western Thrace. I'm talking about the Greek speaking Muslims of Trabzon. --Tēlex 16:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK I'm so sorry!  I misunderstood. I should be more careful.  --Gokhan 20:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move 2006

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~''
*Support --Tēlex 19:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could still do with splitting out into sections — if you insist as keeping it as one page :) - FrancisTyers · 10:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll see what I can do. --Tēlex 10:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: :Add any additional comments
I don't know, honestly, and I'm not even certain that Macedonian Muslims was a brilliant idea, even if I appreciate the simplicity of the solution you propose. Also, giving a look to scholarship through Google Print, I noted that "Greek muslims" (or "Muslim Greeks") is simply always used for the Greek muslim minority, and never for "Greek-speaking Muslims". The latter instead seems to be used in scholarship .--Aldux 00:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Muslim Greeks" is also widely used for the Greek-speaking Muslims in Turkey , it's just that technically, Greek Muslims is the term used by Greeks (Έλληνες Μουσουλμάνοι) and Turks (Yunan Müslümanları). Also, if you check a few of those results, they are referring to the Greek-speaking Muslims, e.g.  and  (which distinguishes between Greek Muslims and non-Greek Muslims in Turkey). Also, technically, Greek-speaking Muslims may be inaccurate, because the so-called Greek-speaking Muslims in Greece and Turkey are bilingual in Greek and Turkish (as are the Turks in Greece), and the only distinction is what is used as a home language. Other groups such as Pomaks and Roma have their own languages in addition to Greek and Turkish, although strictly only Turkish is ever used in worship. As I said, it will be ambiguous, and that's why a disambiguation note will be necessary: Greek Muslims (in the sense of Greek-speaking Muslims) only form part of the Greek Muslim minority (who are also sometimes referred to as Greek Muslims). The term Greek speaking Muslims in never used in Greece or for the Greek-speaking Muslim in Greece, whereas Greek Muslims can be used for the Greek-speaking Muslim in Turkey. --Tēlex 12:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  We don't use any wording like "Yunan Müslümanları" (Greek Muslims) in Turkish at all.  We call the Turks in Greece as "Batı Trakya Türkleri" (Western Thrace Turks).  I beg you please let's not go into another fight on these things.  --Gokhan 16:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not talking about the Turks of Western Thrace. I'm talking about the Greek speaking Muslims of Trabzon. --Tēlex 16:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK I'm so sorry!  I misunderstood. I should be more careful.  --Gokhan 20:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Aldux, this is an urban legend, myth, fairy tale etc. Hardly anyone takes it seriously! --Tēlex 16:43, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, sorry, but you never know what a country can take seriously, even if it is absurd. After all, I come from a country where conspiration theories are all to popular.--Aldux 23:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crypto-Christians 

message: In Turkish, there is no specific naming for Muslims of Greek descent. The words "Yunan", "Yunanlı" are related only to the country of Greece. Thus, it is odd to use the word "Yunan Müslümanları" for people who do not reside in Greece. The word "Yunan Müslümanları" or (more accurately) "Yunanistan Müslümanları" can be used merely for the Muslim community in Greece. Greeks of Anatolia, Istanbul, Cyprus, etc. are named "Rum" in Turkish, not "Yunanlı" as they do not live in Greece. The term "Yunan Müslümanları" seems to be an indelicate translation of the word "Greek Muslims" but it is definitely irrelevant. --Behemoth 05:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's true, but can there be a possibilty of a name like 'Rum Müslümanları'? the word 'Rum' is used for the christain orthodox greeks, right? really, isn't there any name to refer to people of greek decent, speaking greek, but who are religiously muslims in turkey? --Hectorian 15:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Rum Müslümanları" is a pure oxymoron. In fact, if you want to fashion a term in Turkish to indicate people who are of Muslim faith and ethnically Greek (and from Greece) it shall be "Yunanlı Müslümanlar", not "Yunan Müslümanları" and such term does not exist in Turkish. There is definitely no Turkish word to indicate a Greek Muslim in the given context. --Behemoth 17:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To Hectorian: if I understand Behemoth correctly, "Rum Müslümanları" translates into Greek as "Ελληνορθόδοξοι Χριστιανοί Μουσουλμάνοι" ;-) --Tēlex 17:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, it's quite funny. --Behemoth 17:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

text: They are named after localities, such as Giritli, Yanyalı, Oflu, Tonyalı, etc. and these terms may cover (in a broader sense) anyone from these places, whether they are Greek-speaking or not. --Behemoth 17:40, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no real term for them in Greek for them (except maybe the popular folk myth of the κρυπτοχριστιανοί του Πόντου - the crypto-Christians of Pontus). It's interesting that Giritli are called Turkish Cretans in Greek (Τουρκοκρητικοί) and the Yanyalı are called Turks from Ioannina (Τουρκογιαννιώτες) - it's a common perception that Islam and "Greekness" or any other ethnicity are incompatible. Even the Muslim Albanians are called Turkish Albanians (Τουρκαλβανοί). --Tēlex 17:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, any Greek-Orthodox Christian is "Rum" and any Muslim is "Τούρκος". --Behemoth 17:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Yunan Müslümanları'' 

message: When I edited the section about Cypriots, it was only pertaining to Muslim Cypriots who had emigrated to Turkey. Now, as the article is rebuilt to be also related to ones in Cyprus, it needs new edits of the section. Before the "turkification" campaigns of Turkish Resistance Organisation and Denktaş governments, a considerable number of Turkish Cypriots had Greek as their mother tongue. In fact, about 60 % of the names of Turkish villages were in Greek. Is there any information about the current Greek-speaking Turkish Cypriot population in Cyprus? An example is Louroujina where there is also a fast linguistic assimilation going on. However, I am not sure whether even the people of Louroujina may qualify as "Greek Muslims" because they are considered to be of Linobambaki origins core of whom were composed by "Latins" and (to a smaller extent) Maronites rather than Greeks. Anyway, contributions on the subject will be much appreciated. --Behemoth 17:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cyprus 

message: The English language Greek source (Athens News Agency) claims that the population of "ethnic Greeks" is over 5,000. However, a more detailed coverage on the event by the Turkish daily Milliyet reports that the exact figure given by Kotzamanis is at 4,720 and he had also declared that the community is on the way to have a large portion of it composed of "people from Antakya" (i.e. Arabic-speaking and originally of the Antiochian Church).  I also recall that an education expert (a Greek woman from Istanbul who resides in Greece) asserted that about half of students attending Greek Orthodox schools in Istanbul are "from Antakya". I think the reference should be revised accordingly. --Behemoth 11:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: About those arabic-speaking from the south . --Hectorian 23:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Figure by Vyron Kotzamanis

message: ...and should mention and direct towards under separate articles for, 
the actual communities,
* The Muslim community in Western Thrace (autochtonous; who are treated at present in the same article with recent immigrants which is an oddity, since they have a distinct legal status and cultural arguments) 
* The Muslim community in some Dodecanese islands (Rhodes and Kos) (some 5000 people according to my sources; note that I intend to start an article on them some time when I have time) 
* Immigration to Greece (recent immigrants; possibly with subheadings covering specific cases, for example, Albanian immigration to Greece) 
historical communities,
* Cham Albanians (till the aftermath of the World War II) 
historical communities further back, some retaining distinct features,
* Turks of Macedonia centered around Salonica(Macedonia in the sense of the historical region and the Ottoman province here) (mostly monolingual in Turkish)  (till the 1922 Population Exchange and slightly before) (note that we, some Turkish users, intend to use the article on Rumelia for the subject) 
* Sabbateans of Salonica (till the 1922 Population Exchange and slightly before) 
* Cretan Turks (formerly mostly bilingual in Turkish and Cretan Greek) (till the 1922 Population Exchange and slightly before) 
* Muslims of Epirus (Yanyalı in Turkish) (possibly including pockets in Thessaly) (once again, formerly mostly bilingual in Turkish and Greek)) (till the 1922 Population Exchange and slightly before) 
and if you wish to go further back,
* Muslims of the Peloponnese (Moralı in Turkish) 
Note that for Yanyalı and Moralı populations, I am not sure that there is adequately distinctive material to define them under their own articles. 
and finally a separate heading for the tie with, 
* Pontic Greek-speaking populations of some of Turkey's Black Sea districts (under a distinct and proper heading) 
I won't comment on the present title of the article, except to say that it sounds hollow to me. 
Cretanforever
:I think u have misunderstood the article's title... it is not about the muslim population in Greece (for those, see Islam in Greece, but it's about Greek-speaking, Greek-identifying, or of Greek origins muslim populations elsewhere... --Hectorian 23:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Keep in mind that we also have Minority groups in Greece; maybe you should work on the Turkish section there. That said, an article on the Turkish minority wouldn't be a bad idea, if it speaks only of the Turks, without pretending to create a fork of Islam in Greece. As an article on the Thracian muslims, we once had such an article, but it was thought better to merge it with Islam in Greece.--Aldux 00:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, u should comment on the articles title, before commenting in all it deals with. i mean, the things u posted about Cham Albanians and the recent muslim immigrants, are totally irrelevant with this article... Anyway, i wouldn't have any objections about u starting the articles u said. i'll wait and see the way u'll edit, and i will comment afterwards. Taking into consideration your history as an editor in graeco-turkish related articles (Chrysostomos of Smyrna, Cretan Turks), i don't think i will have "many" bad comments to say. --Hectorian 00:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Btw, if u are about to begin an article about the muslims from Ioannina (Yanyalı), have in mind that there were many who resided in Thessaly, and they had an important role in the society and history of the Thessalian plain. I am more than anything else interested in Thessaly, so, i will be greatly involved in such an article... --Hectorian 00:47, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I did not know that the Yanyalı are still ovious in Turkey (even in a small extend, as u said):). If my 'preference' would make any difference, i would prefer Dodecanese Muslims, or Dodecanese Turks (with the note that all muslims in the Ottoman Empire where called 'Turks' when they acquired that name). --Hectorian 01:46, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Do not forget to do what u did in Cretan Turks: Related ethnic groups: Greeks. --Hectorian 02:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The title should be '''Muslim populations in Greece'''

message: Moved from article. Aramgar (talk) 20:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Yanyalılar" were turkish people. Not muslim greeks. Their roots came to Ioannina from Anatolia when the city conquested by Sultan II. Murad in 1432.
Hello, 
do you have any informations about Muslims from Grevena/Kozani region?They used to have the name Βαλαήs/Vala-ís in greek.
thanks
Hi, my grandmother is of Greek ethnicity living in Istanbul. I know for a fact she is a Muslim, but her mother tongue is Greek and her Turkish is broken and poor. So.. it is true. Turkish peoples hide their true origins if they are not ethnic Turks. eg. My whole family.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.208.84.15 (talk) 03:10, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Yanyalılar

message: The Pontic issue is currently the second most important problem in Turkey, after the Kurdish one, and there is an ongoing campaign to eradigate this dialect from the younger generations. Ok I see there is problem with insurgency? But second problem is some almost extinct linguistic group still speakin their language? is that true? if it is then what kind of country Turkey is? can anyone provide references? is problem maybe to harsh word? i guess turkey has bigger problems,like economic ones for example and not campaigning for eradication of some ancient dialect(this upset me alot). anyway references please... Luka Jačov (talk) 19:02, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem? 

message: In 1777–1778, when Catherine the Great of Russia conquered the peninsula from the Ottoman Empire, the local Orthodox population was forcibly deported and settled north of the Azov Sea. In order to avoid deportation, some Greeks chose to convert to Islam. - sorry this sentence doesnt make sense, why would emperess of orthodox country deport one of its own? Luka Jačov (talk) 19:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russian emperess 

message: Can we replace it with "citation needed"? The page it cites gives its source as "internet", which could just as well be wikipedia. Thus, isn't this kind of the equivelant of starting a geocities account with my opinions and then editing wikipedia to match it and claiming its not NPOV because I have a site?
Yeah, c'mon guys, you can do better than that. Theoretically.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.107.214.133 (talk) 18:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  citation 4 

message: The section on "reasons for converting to Islam" strikes this user as just a bit bizarre.  It seems to quote excessively from one source and the disparity of the citations used make it look as though there was some sort of retaliatory exchange between Christians and Muslims on the subject.  I don't want to touch it as I would be far from neutral myself, but it does seem as though someone wrote it with an Islamic agenda in mind and then a Christian retaliated by inserting one damning selective quote...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.100.154.134 (talk) 12:32, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation 3 

message: I agree with the previous comment that this paragraph almost preaches Islam. It is based on a single reference and refers to the supposed "superiority" of the muslim faith that cannot explain at all the long resistance of christian populations to conversion in the Balkans and elsewhere. In addition, balkan Muslims, e.g. Albanians, are rather religiously indifferent, showing that the presented arguments are invalid. It would be interesting to find sources with numbers of converted Christians during the Ottoman Empire.87.147.72.140 (talk) 20:10, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with both IP editors. The tone and tenor of the section is way over the top, as are the block quotes. There is no need to use such block quotes, especially from a source that 100 years old. While some of the material can stay, I have removed the grossly POV parts. Athenean (talk) 23:00, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Obviously biased "Reasons for conversion to Islam" 

message: There are three lists in the article. I haven't checked the sources . But the last one about the converts seems like a convenient list in this article. But what about the first two ? Muslims of Greek descent (non-conversions) ? These two lists are about people whose mother tongues are Ottoman Turkish and were born in typical Ottoman Muslim house . The only thing which relates them to Greek descent was that some of their anchestors were of Greek origin. I don't think these racially oriented lists have anything to do with the text of the article. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 07:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  List about non converts 

message: It should be noted that many, if not most, of these names are of individuals who were of Arvanite Albanian descent, or mix Arvanite-Greek descent, and not purely Greek, such as those surnamed Pasha, all of whom were Albanian.
Before the twilight of the Ottoman Empire, many ethnic Albanians inhabited Greek Epirus and other parts of Greece, they spoke Greek, in addition to their peculiar dialect of Albanian, and identified as Albanian. We should also stress that it was exceptionally, exceptionally rare that Greeks would convert to Islam.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.201.173.75 (talk) 23:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greeks or Albanians? 

message: The sources do not say if these individuals were indeed ethnic Greeks or spoke Greek. The situation might have been similar like in Crete, but we would need more sources.  Andreas  (T) 21:00, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thessalian and Southern Greek Muslims 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the move request was: Not Moved - Stability of the article at it's current title since July 2006 is the driving factor here. Despite a few cogent arguments on both sides, there's no overwhelming consensus to move to new title and the article can have only one title. My suggestion is to make the appropriate adjustments within the article to clarify any misconceptions.  This is more a content issue than a title issue. Mike Cline (talk) 13:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Greek Muslims →  – The title of the article infers that people who are Greek speaking and Muslim are Greeks, when their unique communities now resident in Turkey have historically not identified with Greek identity. It represents an erroneous position, which when it comes to other similar communities with complex linguistic and other identities (like the Arvanites or Slavic speakers in Greece), they are not referred to as Albanians, or Macedonians/Bulgarians, because people within those communities may disagree with such names. For more see below:relisted --Mike Cline (talk) 14:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

text: Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~''
*Support --(Resnjari (talk) 06:24, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: "Muslims of Greek descent" does not depend on people recognizing themselves as Greek. It merely needs descent. "Muslims of Greek extraction" similarly does not need self-identification as "Greek", merely a relationship in history. Muslim Greeks and Greek Muslims and Islamic Greeks  are shorter, but would seem to indicate a closer relationship. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 00:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The contents of the article refer to descent, why the need to refer to it in the title. Though i understand where your coming from with this, a precedent has already been established with regards to the Arvanites and Slavic speakers in Greece and articles relating to them. There as the Greek editors have time and time again shown and rightly so that those people don't identify with such self appellations, even though they are of Albanian and Bulgarian/Macedonian descent respectfully and thus the title pages are not Orthodox Albanians in Greece or Bulgarian/Macedonians in Greece. The same should apply for this community and the most neutral title is Greek speaking Muslims as their language, apart from their past and current geographic location is what makes them a distinctive group. We should be fair and impartial and not impose other labels for the sake of expediency. Even the Greek term for this community in the infobox on the main page is Ελληνόφωνοι μουσουλμάνοι which translates to Greek speaking Muslims. I also think that this page should be linked to the Turkey portal on Wikipedia as well, considering that this community has historically identified as Turks and that most of them reside in Turkey today and play an important role in their society and not Greece's. Resnjari (talk) 11:17, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

text: I agree with a lot of what you say. It is true that this community was never an irredentism target for the short-lived Greek nationalism, the best proof is that they were sent away in the 1923 population exchange on grounds of religion. Actually, their Greek character was actually only underlined by later scholars new opinions surfaced about this exchange and the Greek-Turkish conflict. But this only adds to my confusion about your request. Nobody, not the article, nor its current title, implies that the current community in Turkey is disloyal to the Turkish state or a fifth-column of the Greek State, or I missed something. Also, the scope of the article goes way beyond the current community: it goes from the times of the Ottoman Empire and the devşirme to... Cat Stevens. In order to be the most WP:PRECISE and WP:CONCISE and cover the entire geographical and historical scope, the best (and neutral) title seems to me... Greek Muslims. Place Clichy (talk) 10:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The main marker of these communities regarding their "Greek character" is their language. I am not disputing scholarly research. But it is they who state in their texts, which form the sources for this article that these people do not regard themselves as Greeks. Scholars also talk about the "Albanian" character of the Arvanites or the "Bulgarian/Macedonian" character of the Slavic speakers in Greece, yet the articles on wikipedia reflect the terminology that the communities themselves use, or at the very least neutral non provocative ones without agendas. Also i did not imply that somehow the article implies that these people were "disloyal Turks" or something along those lines. But if you do not include the important word speaking as the middle word in the title, then a person visiting the page will at first assume that the article is talking about Greeks who are Muslim, which is definitely not the case. All of these Greek speaking communities do not identify as Greeks. And yes there are the few in current times, (and i stress the few) who like Cat Stevens are of Greek heritage and may still identify as such, however, just because of those few that identify as such, it should not be the main indicator for imposing the term Greek on the rest of these people who only have Greek as a language, and do not have any ethno-affiliations to being Greek. The one main common factor that all these communities and individuals share is that they have Greek as a language that they speak. Its why the title Greek speaking Muslims does away with any bias issues and it is a neutral title which connects all these complex communities and individuals together, while stressing their main unique trait i.e: language. Resnjari (talk) 04:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

text: I also notified Wikipedia:Greek and Turkish wikipedians cooperation board, although it does not seem to be very active these days. Place Clichy (talk) 10:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Support: In the lede it reads; " Muslims of Greek ethnic origin whose adoption of Islam..." Well it may be just the opposite also. "Turks who kept their religion but adopted Greek language in an area where the majority of the population speak Greek." Thus Greek speaking Muslims is a better title. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 15:55, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That still has the problem that many descendants of Greeks who are Muslim do not speak Greek but are still covered in this article. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk)   — Preceding undated comment added 05:37, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

text: The same can be said of the people regarding the article Albanian-speakers of Western Thrace or Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia. Yet the article names are considered the most neutral and best regarding describing their past/current group formation. Precedents on wikipedia already exist in this regard. Resnjari (talk) 11:02, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Though stability of the article has been chosen as the main impetus for keeping the title as it is, people who chose convenience back then as opposed to discussing the merits of such a change due to a lack of expertise has resulted in the title today being problematic. I feel that a more wide ranging debate needs to take place by others who either come from such communities themselves or have expertise in the area. These people, mostly feel Turkish and not Greek, as academic sources and the people themselves have declared. I have voiced my concern with the title of this article as it infers certain identities i.e. "Greek" about a people who want nothing to do with a Greek identity. Their only connection to Greek culture is through language which they call by a different name, either Romieka (not used by Orthodox Greeks today) and Rumca in Turkish. It would be like saying and naming articles in wikipedia which would infer that current day English speaking USA are "English" when they do not feel so, even though lets say of the sake of argument that someone had named an article as such; and for the sake of stability no change occurred to rectify it. The next step, in accordance with wikipedia policy would be to undertake Publicising discussions and seeing what discussions would manifest. 
Resnjari (talk) 16:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 24 February 2015 

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~''
*Support --(Resnjari (talk) 06:24, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: "Muslims of Greek descent" does not depend on people recognizing themselves as Greek. It merely needs descent. "Muslims of Greek extraction" similarly does not need self-identification as "Greek", merely a relationship in history. Muslim Greeks and Greek Muslims and Islamic Greeks  are shorter, but would seem to indicate a closer relationship. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 00:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The contents of the article refer to descent, why the need to refer to it in the title. Though i understand where your coming from with this, a precedent has already been established with regards to the Arvanites and Slavic speakers in Greece and articles relating to them. There as the Greek editors have time and time again shown and rightly so that those people don't identify with such self appellations, even though they are of Albanian and Bulgarian/Macedonian descent respectfully and thus the title pages are not Orthodox Albanians in Greece or Bulgarian/Macedonians in Greece. The same should apply for this community and the most neutral title is Greek speaking Muslims as their language, apart from their past and current geographic location is what makes them a distinctive group. We should be fair and impartial and not impose other labels for the sake of expediency. Even the Greek term for this community in the infobox on the main page is Ελληνόφωνοι μουσουλμάνοι which translates to Greek speaking Muslims. I also think that this page should be linked to the Turkey portal on Wikipedia as well, considering that this community has historically identified as Turks and that most of them reside in Turkey today and play an important role in their society and not Greece's. Resnjari (talk) 11:17, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

text: I agree with a lot of what you say. It is true that this community was never an irredentism target for the short-lived Greek nationalism, the best proof is that they were sent away in the 1923 population exchange on grounds of religion. Actually, their Greek character was actually only underlined by later scholars new opinions surfaced about this exchange and the Greek-Turkish conflict. But this only adds to my confusion about your request. Nobody, not the article, nor its current title, implies that the current community in Turkey is disloyal to the Turkish state or a fifth-column of the Greek State, or I missed something. Also, the scope of the article goes way beyond the current community: it goes from the times of the Ottoman Empire and the devşirme to... Cat Stevens. In order to be the most WP:PRECISE and WP:CONCISE and cover the entire geographical and historical scope, the best (and neutral) title seems to me... Greek Muslims. Place Clichy (talk) 10:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The main marker of these communities regarding their "Greek character" is their language. I am not disputing scholarly research. But it is they who state in their texts, which form the sources for this article that these people do not regard themselves as Greeks. Scholars also talk about the "Albanian" character of the Arvanites or the "Bulgarian/Macedonian" character of the Slavic speakers in Greece, yet the articles on wikipedia reflect the terminology that the communities themselves use, or at the very least neutral non provocative ones without agendas. Also i did not imply that somehow the article implies that these people were "disloyal Turks" or something along those lines. But if you do not include the important word speaking as the middle word in the title, then a person visiting the page will at first assume that the article is talking about Greeks who are Muslim, which is definitely not the case. All of these Greek speaking communities do not identify as Greeks. And yes there are the few in current times, (and i stress the few) who like Cat Stevens are of Greek heritage and may still identify as such, however, just because of those few that identify as such, it should not be the main indicator for imposing the term Greek on the rest of these people who only have Greek as a language, and do not have any ethno-affiliations to being Greek. The one main common factor that all these communities and individuals share is that they have Greek as a language that they speak. Its why the title Greek speaking Muslims does away with any bias issues and it is a neutral title which connects all these complex communities and individuals together, while stressing their main unique trait i.e: language. Resnjari (talk) 04:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: * Islamic Greeks should probably redirect here to complement existing titles Greek Muslims and Muslim Greeks -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 00:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I also notified Wikipedia:Greek and Turkish wikipedians cooperation board, although it does not seem to be very active these days. Place Clichy (talk) 10:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Support: In the lede it reads; " Muslims of Greek ethnic origin whose adoption of Islam..." Well it may be just the opposite also. "Turks who kept their religion but adopted Greek language in an area where the majority of the population speak Greek." Thus Greek speaking Muslims is a better title. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 15:55, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That still has the problem that many descendants of Greeks who are Muslim do not speak Greek but are still covered in this article. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk)   — Preceding undated comment added 05:37, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

text: The same can be said of the people regarding the article Albanian-speakers of Western Thrace or Slavic speakers of Greek Macedonia. Yet the article names are considered the most neutral and best regarding describing their past/current group formation. Precedents on wikipedia already exist in this regard. Resnjari (talk) 11:02, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.</div>
Though stability of the article has been chosen as the main impetus for keeping the title as it is, people who chose convenience back then as opposed to discussing the merits of such a change due to a lack of expertise has resulted in the title today being problematic. I feel that a more wide ranging debate needs to take place by others who either come from such communities themselves or have expertise in the area. These people, mostly feel Turkish and not Greek, as academic sources and the people themselves have declared. I have voiced my concern with the title of this article as it infers certain identities i.e. "Greek" about a people who want nothing to do with a Greek identity. Their only connection to Greek culture is through language which they call by a different name, either Romieka (not used by Orthodox Greeks today) and Rumca in Turkish. It would be like saying and naming articles in wikipedia which would infer that current day English speaking USA are "English" when they do not feel so, even though lets say of the sake of argument that someone had named an article as such; and for the sake of stability no change occurred to rectify it. The next step, in accordance with wikipedia policy would be to undertake Publicising discussions and seeing what discussions would manifest. 
Resnjari (talk) 16:10, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: Does this page includes Turkish people who immigrated to Turkey after population exchange? Because this article is a bit, what should i say, made up.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.171.198.1 (talk) 17:29, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a difference between nationality and ethnicity. The sources you used also state reasons why people are unwilling to identify openly with a minority ethnicity in Turkey, especially towards foreign researchers. You fail to point out such nuances. There are also cases of individuals who do claim Pontic Greek cultural heritage (for instance writer Ömer Asan and singer Apolas Lermi, or myself and elderly Muslim Greek seakers I know), do you think it is wrong of them to identify in such a way? I think your conception of what constitutes Greekness is a bit nationalistic, which is in fact one of the reasons why many Pontian Greek Muslims are afraid to speak out (and what forces them into Turkish nationalism). NeoRetro (talk) 19:40, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have peer reviewed sources on the matter, do so (and also provide inline's too). However most of the community identifies solely as Turks. What state processes lead to that is up to you to outline using peer reviewed sources. Nonetheless, today and starting from the 1980s when Western scholars did fieldwork amongst this community, people kept telling them they feel Turkish and only Turkish, not Greek.Resnjari (talk) 20:47, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  The scope of this article is not restricted to the period starting from the 1980s and the territory of the Republic of Turkey. Of course people from this community who live in Turkey, today, are faithful and lawful citizens of Turkey. It is you, Resnjari, repeating this again and again and again that give the opposite feeling (maybe it is your point of view, and as NeoRetro writes maybe your view on the subject is a bit nationalistic). Also, they probably speak Turkish more often than Greek in their daily lives. However, in a historical perspective, the Greek heritage is a defining element of this community, otherwise the title would be Turkish Muslims. Maybe Greek communities of Muslim faith, in all parts of the Ottoman empire and other countries, in all periods of time, should be the focus of inputs to this article. Place Clichy (talk) 15:24, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: All i am going to say is this. Back yourself up with peer reviewed scholarship like i have. Otherwise its opinion and wp:original research. Fieldwork regarding these communities has mainly started in the 1980s when questions about self-identification were put to Grecophone Muslim communities. Before that it is somewhat difficult to ascertain. Like i said to the previous editor, if you have peer reviewed material backing your point, then add it, otherwise, no. As for "they probably speak Turkish more often than Greek in their daily lives" i have fully cited it in the article that for a sizable minority (for the Pontic Grecophone Muslim community) that is not the case. Some do not have knowledge of Turkish at all due to their geographic isolation and conservatism. That said they still identify as Turk only and disavow any links to being Greek. Please base statements at least on facts and not conjecture. So just in case anything has been missed, when fieldwork has been done, the respondents from these communities have time and time again refused any identification with being Greek. That is fact and based on Western peer reviewed scholarship. And like Neoretro, I also know some number of people here in Melbourne from Grecophone Muslim communities and they are the most nationalistic of any Turks i have ever met. They feel they are Turks and that they do not even speak Yunanca (i.e Greek), but Rumca. That's how it is with them. They are Greek speaking Turks, as the scholarship bears out.Resnjari (talk) 16:00, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: You are employing the present tense ("they are...") and I keep trying to tell you about historical perspective vs. presentism. The subject of your, may I say, passion, is post-1980s Turkey, and we keep telling you that this is not (not only) the subject of this article. Ibrahim Edhem Pasha and Hayreddin Barbarossa were dead long before 1980, as were the first generation of Byzantines who converted after the Conquest (and they were totally Greek, while being Muslims). Place Clichy (talk) 18:50, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: If one was to look at the whole historical period of Anatolia going back say up to the Battle of Manzikert, Anatolia was Orthodox and Greek speaking and i have never denied that. Speros Vryonis in the wide-ranging study called The Decline of Medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor and the Process of Islamization from the Eleventh through the Fifteenth Century chronicled that process for the most part and very little of that analysis has been disproven (except issues of contestation have been it differed in some places over others  etc). That process resulted in today current day Turkish population. Pockets of Greek speakers that became part of the Ottoman state much later like Trabzon, Crete, the Grevena valley of Macedonia etc converted to Islam, though did not undergo a linguistic and to some extent a full identity change (eg. retention of word for language Romeyka and at times self appellation of Romiaois). By the 20th century these people especially like the Cretans where very pro-Turkish. Also Greeks in Greece did not see Grecopohne Muslims as fellow compatriots, as outlined in the article.  Now regarding for what you call "historical perspective", the article covers the modern era because most of the research on the community has occurred about and during the modern era. And when fieldwork had been conducted, Grecophone Muslims have over and over again told in no unequivocal terms that they are Turks, not Greeks. In the article the conversion process has already been outlined, if you have read it. What was missing in the past was what these people identified as today. The peer reviewed sources I added have filled that gap of contemporary times. These people overwhelmingly feel Turkish. Also about the first generation of converts of the medeevil era and thereafter, you have no peer reviewed sources explaining what they “felt” or how they defined Greek, if at all. So far its WP:original research. My “passion” as you call it is for facts and that the article reflects that even if information may not be to a other persons liking. If you want to edit the article, do so, any addition though must reflect peer reviewed material. This community to use their own designations feel Turk, are Musliims and only have knowledge/speak Greek.Resnjari (talk) 19:24, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: "Medievil era" ?? Have you read any of the sources you used? Because it doesn't seem like it. I never said anything about "the first group of converts". Anyway, that is 17th and 18th century... not the middle ages! "Also Greeks in Greece did not see Grecopohne Muslims as fellow compatriots, as outlined in the article." This depends on what source you read. "And when fieldwork had been conducted, Grecophone Muslims have over and over again told in no unequivocal terms that they are Turks, not Greeks." Yes. So? In national terms they are Turks and not Greeks. This has nothing to do with ethnic cultural heritage. NeoRetro (talk) 09:41, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes i did. From the 1400s onward the Ottoman state expanded into the Balkans proper and later Cyprus and the Trebizond state. Conversions started then and later with the passing of time accelerated in the 17th and 18th century, depending on the region and its sociopolitical circumstances. For example some number of the local elites where ones to convert first to preserve land and privileges in the late medieval period. Also if you see in my comments i was answering Place Clichy too alongside you. Regarding the compatriots matter, its Dr Peter Mackridge who states that. This is the same Mackridge who did fieldwork amongst Pontic Grecophone Muslim communities in the 1980s. You say there are other sources, if there are them bring them here (like i have said to other editors in times past, i will not do all the work). Make sure their peer reviewed and academic, See WP:reliable. This article needs more work done. Ethnic cultural heritage (regarding Romeyka language and so on) is Greek. No one denies that. But these Grecophone Muslim communities on a whole repeatedly feel and self identify as Turk as being their identity. You say there are individual cases to the contrary and i don't doubt that for one second, but you need to find sources that cite this. There are people from Grecophone Muslim communities that found this article offensive and wanted to even get rid of many references. On their talkpages i had to have lengthy discussions a long while ago about not doing that. There are conflicting views in the Grecophone Muslim communities (whether a minority or majority view/s). I prefer to go by peer reviewed scholarship, so as to avoid any quagmires and go by information as outlined by peer reviewed scholarship. So should all editors.Best.Resnjari (talk) 17:07, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

text: It is quite sad, the generalizing statements you make like "That's how it is with them." Who exactly do you think you are, to be entitled to decide for other people what their identity is? NeoRetro (talk) 16:36, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Grecophone Muslims. Very easy. The scholarship time and time again shows they identify as Turks. I go by that. Its all cited in the article in case there is any further queries. Same with say for example the Arvanites, they are Albanian speaking (well sometime back) Greeks. And that's how it is with them too as per the scholarship. I have  always based myself by the scholarship. If anyone has an issue with that, email the scholars who do the research and discuss it with them.Resnjari (talk) 16:40, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  A question 

message: Don't we think it is vandalism that many were erased by saying "partially greek no need to add to list" on wikipedia which is written by turks. Manaviko (talk) 17:54, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not sure what you mean by your comment regarding "vandalism". This article has barely even been touched by Turkish editors, though i welcome their contribution which is more than overdue. As for for myself i am of Albanian heritage. The article is based on peer reviewed material. Grecophone Muslims identify as Turks and not Hellenes just to clarify.Resnjari (talk) 10:57, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly, how do you judge who is Turkish and who is not? Why are you in the business of judging other peoples ethnic background? Secondly, could you stop speaking in general terms about me and my family? You don't know us, so don't include us in your generalizations. NeoRetro (talk) 22:08, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not talk in generalized terms. Scholars who have done fieldwork amongst Grecophone Muslim communities have stated in their peer reviewed works that these people state to them that they feel and identify as Turkish. Your experience of the matter is different to that outlined in peer reviewed literature, however to place something in this article that refers to Grecophone Muslims feeling Greek, you would need sources that meet wp:reliable and wp:secondary. Absent that, the rest is wp:original research. Otherwise if do things outside that, then all sorts of things can be placed in a article. Wikipedia has guidelines and polices, please refer to them as i have.Resnjari (talk) 10:03, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it extremely childish that you keep referring to rules. This is the talk page. You are generalizing and I find it offensive towards me personally.NeoRetro (talk) 10:08, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: To be clear: I never deleted anything you added to the page, and nowhere did I imply that we should add data that is not sourced. That you indicate otherwise dilutes the discussion. I merely oppose generalizing terms that you use regularly.NeoRetro (talk) 10:18, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing "childish" or offensive. Wikipedia guidelines and its policies which are basically its rules states that content must be based on peer reviewed literature. See: wp:secondary. Grecophone Muslim communities in Turkey identify as Turks and Muslims. You are yet to present peer reviewed sources that contradict this. Your personal experience is your experience. However Wikipedia does not function on wp:original. If you ever encounter one of those scholars in your community undertaking fieldwork tell them that there are some few who don't identify as Turks. Until that view is expressed in scholarship, i go by what is written in it and not personal sentiment about what is right or not regarding what a community identifies themselves as.Resnjari (talk) 10:27, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I never suggested otherwise. I just oppose generalizing. I never said Muslim Greeks identify as Greeks (a modern nationalistic term that even some elderly Christian Pontic Greeks don't use to describe themselves). The literature you refer to also doesn't generalize the way you do. For instance, they refer to the differences in how Greek-speakers present themselves in-group, and towards the majority population. I have even given you a few examples of people that are open about their identity. There is a leftist Turkish pro-Pontic Facebook page with tens of thousands of likes. I'm not asking you to rewrite history, I'm just pointing out the fact that you are generalizing based on very thin claims. Instead of saying '[all] Muslim [Pontic] Greeks feel Turks' [period], you should say: "Researchers have found that most Muslim Greek speakers identify primarily as Turks, however, the number of respondents is usually limited to a handful of people."NeoRetro (talk) 10:47, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Facebook is not wp:reliable. Otherwise i, or anyone could use it as a "source" for multiple articles etc. I have never said that Grecophone Muslims emerged out of a Orthodox Greek speaking populace. Same for most Turks too. However as the peer reviewed sources state for contemporary times, over and over again, respondents from the communities have overwhelmingly stated that view to these researchers. To say that these communities call themselves "Greeks" without providing wp:reliable and wp:secondary is wp:POV. I go  by what peer reviewed sources have stated, not what i "should" say. For this to be in the article > "however, the number of respondents is usually limited to a handful of people." you need wp:reliable sources.Resnjari (talk) 10:54, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you talking about?? The number of respondents is given in the research that is cited itself. Have you read the sources on this page? Also, again, why do you keep implying that I would want the article to say they are Greek?? Where did you read this??? Also, I never suggested Facebook is a reliable source. I don't know how you got that idea. I have been on Wikipedia for 7 years, I know how it works...NeoRetro (talk) 10:59, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

text: You say you have given me examples on how people represent themselves, based on what you say. These researchers have spent time traversing those villages. Mackridge, Schreiber, Hakan and Bortone keep getting the same replies from Grecophone Pontic Muslims. There is no contradiction in this. As for "Also, again, why do you keep implying that I would want the article to say they are Greek?? Where did you read this??? Also, I never suggested Facebook is a reliable source." That you brought up Facebook to make your point is saying something toward that. Otherwise why bring it up. I can make a similar case for Arvanites etc. Some few individuals are ok with identifying as ALbanian. Agian that still is wp:original. As for the sources in the article, yes i am aware of them as i placed a great deal of them there with inlines. Also for having this, "however, the number of respondents is usually limited to a handful of people." if you feel that is the case and have identified that in all those scholars, find the page and inline for that. Bortone gives a general overview of what the Grecophone Pontic community feels which contradicts your few respondents answer. So you say you know how Wikipedia works, then find wp:reliable sources that affirm your position. I will not do work for other people.Resnjari (talk) 12:38, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I never asked you to do so. I just ask you to stop generalizing. And I don't know why you keep discussing Albania. I don't care about that at all. "That you brought up Facebook to make your point is saying something toward that." No it is not. "These researchers have spent time traversing those villages." So have I, that doesn't mean anything. NeoRetro (talk) 20:09, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: "So have I, that doesn't mean anything." Yes it does. They are scholars who get their research published in peer reviewed publications and meet wp:reliable. All your giving me is wp:original research. As for Albania, i cite that because its similar, there are some few individuals who claim Albanian heritage amongst the Arvanites(i.e.the late Aristidhis Kolias etc),, bu that in no way speaks for the whole group as peer reviewed research states otherwise. Same with here. Find sources that sya there are people within the Grecophone Muslim community who have different ways of viewing thier identity etc.Resnjari (talk) 03:32, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Muslims Helens 

message: I dispute the source used for this statement: "or simply because of the corruption of the Greek clergy.[13]" The source comes from The preaching of Islam: a history of the propagation of the Muslim faith by Thomas Walker Arnold published in 1896. Wikipedia strongly encourages the use of secondary sources especially for controversial, or strong claims. The claim in question is strong, and the source is biased for two reasons, which is enabled by the fact that it was published 120 years ago. A. This is a field this author brought about, this is one important to him, as such it is important for him to stress the importance of it, especially in regards to other ideologies of the times. B. Biases in the west against Eastern Orthodoxy. If a modern peer reviewed source can't be found, I'm going to nix it. I've read the cited pages, and Thomas Walker Arnold merely states stuff, the best provided is often the name of some person who he got the information from, in this way his history is very much like that of Herodotus, and makes this history more bare in line with a primary source, as opposed to a secondary. Sorry if this explanation is convoluted, it's 0:17 where I live, and I'm quite tired. (Alcibiades979 (talk) 22:17, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with Arnold is not that he is a secondary source, but that he is very, very outdated.  1896 is a different world.  I agree that unless a modern source can be found this should go. Athenean (talk) 22:26, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: We need more stuff though on conversions, especially in relation to the Orthodox church and its flock and what their various conditions of the various dioceses that lead to religious conversion. Apart from external Ottoman factors and relations with the wider Muslim populations (peaceful/violent and so on) that propelled conversion, were there internal breakdowns within the church structures that also gave way to those conversions in certain regions and points in time? If any of you or other editors have expertise (and access of knowledge of the scholarship) in those matters, do add. The article is lacking much about that. I have done a lot to update the current state regarding these communties. However more improvement is needed. Best.Resnjari (talk) 07:51, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Problem is stuff like that isn't always so easy to dig up on Library databases, and google scholar. You would be amazed at the amount of total BS on Google Scholar, ~40k hits on scholarly works about Ulysses by Joyce, which makes finding sources a pain especially since I don't know the scholars who specialize in it, and theorize that most of the scholarly work is in either Greek or Turkish. While your point is understood about how the Greek Orthodox Church dealt with external changes, I think something that's important to bear in mind is the fates of the rest of the churches that came under moslem domination. The numbers for all of them in the end eek out to relatively similar amounts, until that genocides started, ie Coptic Orthodox Church, the Church of the East, the Assyrian Orthodox Church, etc. I think a major factor was the economic impacts of remaining Christian, ie the Jiyza tax, as well as constant discrimination, and sporadic pogroms of non-moslems. This realm is a little past my forte which is the Byzantine Empire, but something else that certainly can be worked with is personal connection to God, my understanding is the earlier Orthodox Church stressed the need of a Priest as an intercessor, economic impacts, and also the fact that islam was originally viewed as being a off shoot of Christianity, moslems believe in Jesus, the koran is a somewhat hellenistic work, it recites much of the history from the Bible, and has a lot of points in common, another realm to explore is the economic road presented by Islam of raiding the land of war, which was influential for many converts, to raid Christian lands would enrich the moslems, and if they should be killed they were promised 72 virgins in paradise, where as the Orthodox Church took a much stricter look at killing and forbade it, even for Christian soldiers against moslems, denying them Communion for 2 years afterward as a time of repentance. The Byzantine Emperor Leo the Wise talks about this quite abit, and how that influences Byzantine military strategy, his works should be free online. (Alcibiades979 (talk) 15:13, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: The issues for conversion to which you made reference too relate mainly when Anatolia was going from a Orthodox and Greek speaking Byzantine ruled area into a Muslim and Turkish Ottoman ruled area leaving Greek speaking pockets of both Muslim and Orthodox religions on the coast and their nearby hinterlands. That process relates to the 11tth-14th centuries which resulted in the emergence of today's Anatolia's Turkish population. My comments about needing for this article to address the conversion matter was in relation to a post 1453 environment in which these communities Orthodox Greek speaking fore-bearers and thereafter converted to Islam and acquired some form of Turkish identity while still retaining cultural elements dating from the Byzantine era (namely Greek language and refering to the language as Romeika). As this article covers different communities and geographies it is also somewhat more complicated in a pre-1453 context. Prior to that, the changes taking place in Anatolia where more uniform due to the Beylik system and the rise of Bektashi syncretic Islam which had its influence on the population alongside other factors that you cite. For a extensive study which for the most past still holds in scholarship, see: Speros Vryonis (1971). The decline of medieval Hellenism in Asia Minor: and the process of Islamization from the eleventh through the fifteenth century. University of California Press. There are a few different issues for the reason for conversion of the post-1453 communities. Conversion in Ioannina and Konitsa was done by the local Greek speaking Orthodox elite who became part of the timar class. In Crete after the conquest was done more or less conversion was voluntarily and the Vallades only converted in the late 18th and early 18th century and were mainly Bektashi's. In Pontus conversion points to it being forced. This though is from the literature which i used for the article though did not cite for the conversion matter though. I wanted something more detailed and am still after something more detailed. Regarding the issues of virgins, though i have come across in the material about the ghazi warrior culture and wars done for conquering the area of Anatolia for Islam, nothing about the virgins matter. Also about the Quran being a somewhat hellenistic work is somewhat problematic. On studies on conversion, the Quran derived a large proportion of its conceptual framework from the Judaeo-Christian tradition. The very text proclaims itself to be a successor to the Jewish and Christian texts. That also had a bearing from those like the Bektashi when they went around preaching to the common folk. If you come across stuff, do add. Best.Resnjari (talk) 15:57, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reasons For Conversion 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Greek Muslims. 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/20160303181832/http://www.orsam.org.tr/en/enUploads/Article/Files/2010110_sayi11_eng_web.pdf to http://www.orsam.org.tr/en/enUploads/Article/Files/2010110_sayi11_eng_web.pdf
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) 21:14, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Greek Muslims. 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/20080222063342/http://www.e-bogazici.com/pinfo.asp?pid=224 to http://www.e-bogazici.com/pinfo.asp?pid=224
*Added archive https://archive.is/20020609043055/http://www.paramythia.gr/enpage2.html to http://www.paramythia.gr/enpage2.html
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) 08:25, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This phrasing implies that there is a Greek language distinct from its dialects.  That is an unfashionable prescriptivism; most linguists would say Standard Greek is one dialect among many.  
That aside, "and/or" also implies that many of these people speak both the standard language and regional dialect(s).  Is that true?
I would replace "Greek and/or its dialects" with "Greek dialects". —Tamfang (talk) 18:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Good observation Tamfang. I corrected it. Demetrios1993 (talk) 00:19, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greek and/or its dialects 

message: The original title of the painting is "Jeunes Grecs à la mosquée", which translates as "Young Greeks at the Mosque". "Arnaoutes en prière" is not even an original alternative title. It was first mentioned by Luan Rama, in his 2016 publication "Les Albanais de Léon Gérôme/Shqiptarët e Léon Gérôme". Aside of him, all of the Museums and early publications that i checked present it with the original title:
*Etching of the painting published between 1865-1873 by Goupil & Cie (run by Gérôme's father-in-law)
*Philadelphia Museum of Art
*The British Museum
*Minneapolis Institute of Art
*Le premier siècle de l'Institut de France : 25 octobre 1795-25 octobre 1895 (1895-1896)
*Gravures, photogravures, lithographies & photographies (1886) - Number 36 Demetrios1993 (talk) 12:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: that title does not describe the subject of the painting, because J. L. Gérôme depicted the same Arnautes in several works: albanianart.net by Robert Elsie. The inaccuracy is the same as the painting titled Markos Botzaris, which does not depict Markos Botsaris, but an Arnaut chief, see :Commons:File:Jean-Léon Gérôme – Marco Bozzari, 1874.jpg and :Commons:File:Prayer in the Mosque.jpg. – Βατο (talk) 13:09, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: So what? This is ridiculous. Paintings are not meant to be "accurate", they are paintings, not scientific works. And can you for once stop trying to have your way through edit-warring and try to reach a consensus in the talkage? The "my way or the highway" approach is getting really old. Khirurg (talk) 14:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  the stable version is without it, hence you have to reach consensus before reverting. A painting that depicts an unrelated subject can't be included as the image of the Infobox of this article. Your statement  is inappropriate here because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and editors should include accurate content. – Βατο (talk) 15:12, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

text: I completely agree with Bato's statement. Having a painting which depicts Albanians in an article that is supposed to be about Greeks is not logical, the previous picture was better suited for the topic. Ahmet Q. (talk) 17:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The fact that we are even arguing about something so trivial is ridiculous. The artist doesn't present Arnauts in the respective painting, he presents Greeks, hence the title. He was very well aware that Arnauts and Greeks were two distinct people, so his choice of a title is certainly not based on ignorance or mistake. And no, the artist hasn't painted these two Greek youths that are depicted praying anywhere else. The original title of the work and the one that continues to be used up to this day uninterruptedly is Jeunes Grecs à la mosquée/Young Greeks in the Mosque, not Arnaoutes en prière as it was falsely claimed in the rv reason. And even Arnaoutes en prière is an alternative title that was created subjectively by the Albanian diplomat Luan Rama in 2016, and as far as i am aware used only by him; something that also relates to WP:WEIGHT. And that isn't the only painting that Rama associates with Albanians from a subjective point of view. Anyway, for the sake of ending this trivial discussion i am returning it to the stable version. Demetrios1993 (talk) 22:01, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox Image 

message: This page deals with Greek Muslims, who are of Greek origin. The section on partial Greek origin seems ridiculous, some of these figures are included because they had a grandfather or some ancestor that was Greek. This page should only include clearly Greek Muslims, not people who have some Greek ancestry because of one parent or grandparent or great-grandparent. Unless Greek identity was somehow relevant to them (such as being raised as a Greek), it should be removed. Veritaes Unam (talk) 05:13, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with this proposition. Descent from a specific ethnic group can be both partial and full, and the title of this section is accurate and NPOV, namely "Muslims of partial Greek descent (non-conversions)". Furthermore, even if the descent from a certain ethnic group is partial, it is important enough and is included in the articles of the respective individuals as well. Last, the claim that only a grandparent or some other distant ancestor of theirs was Greek is false. By doing a quick scan i saw that mostly their mothers were Greek. Demetrios1993 (talk) 16:03, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: But the page is about “Greek Muslims.” Meaning that they have an ethnic identity as Greek, or speak Greek, or were raised as Greek, not just having one parent that is Greek. That isn’t enough to define them as “Greek Muslims” in a meaningful sense  Veritaes Unam (talk) 18:13, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Per the lede of this article, , thus it doesn't only pertain to having been raised as Greek (and later converting) or speaking the Greek language or having a Greek ethnic identity (consciousness). Demetrios1993 (talk) 20:39, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of partial origin section 

message: The article misses the Greeks who forcibly converted to Islam in 1914, 1923 and 1955 to stay in Turkey and not expelled to Greece. Marillesa (talk) 14:46, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  east thrace 1914, population exchange 1923 and istanbul pogrom 1955