Gotûbêj:Fetihkirina Trebzonê

message: @GPinkerton Are you sure about "fetihkirin"? How about dorpêçkirin or dagirkin? Also why not use inline citations? Balyozxane (gotûbêj) 19:41, 25 tebax 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I used fetihkirin because "fetihkirina Stenbolê" (no article!) seems quite common for the 1453 "conquest" and because not only was the Turkish article "Trabzon'un Fethi" but also because the Arabic stem "FTH", from which both words derive, is widely used for the concept of an Islamic conquest (cf. the name "فاتح" "conqueror", "فتاح" as a name of God, the organization en:Fatah, etc.), especially over non-Muslims, in the course of religious wars, etc. Additionally, Mehmed II was called "ابو الفتح‎", and this is one of his most significant "conquests". I did not use dorpêçkirin or dagirkin because I didn't think either conveyed the finality of the event: there were previous Ottoman sieges of the city, but only one really significant conquest which ended a whole empire, while occupation is an understatement for a city which remains under Turkish control 500+ years later. What would you prefer for a "Fall of Constantinople" article, for example? There were many many sieges (AD 378–1453, excluding the pre-Constantinian city's sieges), one "Sack" (1204), one "Fall" (1453), and one "Occupation" (1918–1923). How should these be handled? In my view, the 1453 conquest and the 1461 conquest can both be "fetihkirin", and the other words used for other sorts of events. Does that sound right? GPinkerton (gotûbêj) 20:15, 25 tebax 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: :@GPinkerton I would prefer "ketin" for "fall" since it's widely used , . "Fetihkirin" has too much positive connotation (for turks). I also like that en.wiki uses (1461) in parenthesis since it means the city fell to other forces. This is not the encyclopedia of Islam so there shouldn't be any finality in the title. Balyozxane (gotûbêj) 21:53, 25 tebax 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I prefer the approach taken by the Italian, Spanish, and Polish Wikipedias: it:Caduta di Trebisonda, es:Caída de Trebisonda, and pl:Upadek Trapezuntu - all "Fall of Trebizond" - and Turkish tr:Trabzon'un Fethi (the opposite). en:Siege of Trebizond has the others, but generally, the most important one gets known as the "Fall/Conquest", and all the others get titles with dates in parentheses. I don't think there's really much justification for having the parentheses in the English version. (Like en:Treaty of Versailles vs all the other treaties of Versailles.) Unlike the very many and important sieges of Jerusalem, in the case of Constantinople and Trebizond, like Versailles, there is an obviously most important one.

text: ::I get that we can't take sides, but I don't think either "fall" or "conquest" are non-neutral. "The Conquest" is certainly a big part of Turkish memory, but it was hardly less important in the rest of Europe and the rest of the Islamic world. "Conquest" is just a fact of history, so its not wrong to describe a conquest as such. (e.g. en:Muslim conquest of Persia, en:Conquest of Mexico.) The Spanish-POV term Reconquista, while completely non-neutral, is just the most standard name. I would argue it should be the article title here too. The English article notes "The Arabic term for Reconquista is الاسترداد al-Istirdad (literally "recovery"), although it is more commonly known as سقوط الأندلس suqut al-Andalus, the fall of al-Andalus". Indeed, that is what the Arabic equivalent is called.

text: ::Finality is required in some ways because, per en:WP:CRYSTAL, we shouldn't predict or expect any future events. A related discussion has been going on at en:Talk:Fall of Kabul (2021) for some time; in my view the expression is neutral enough and common enough and that seems the majority view there. "Conquest of Kabul" would be inadequate - there are too many for that to be ambiguous. For both Constantinople and Trebizond, there was only one epochal conquest that changed everything: in both cases, a massive and radical change took place whose consequence endure: both cities went from being Roman cities controlled by a Christian state to being Turkish cities controlled by a Muslim state.

text: ::How would you describe the en:Norman Conquest? GPinkerton (gotûbêj) 22:43, 25 tebax 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nav