Jump to content

Talk:Young Turks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Assyrian genocide

[edit]

how is Assyrian genocide not mentioned? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:240:4100:5C70:2CD4:22D9:854D:9EEE (talk) 13:52, 10 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a brief summary style section. Nothing more is needed, this leads to the main article.  // Timothy :: talk  23:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Relevant Info on Three Pashas from 3rd paragraph of introduction

[edit]

Hello, Arsenic99. Let's talk about the information you are attempting to delete.

Information in Question

These "Three Pashas", as they came to be known, exercised absolute control over the Ottoman Empire from 1913 to 1918, bringing the country closer to Germany, signing the Ottoman–German Alliance to enter the Empire into World War I on the side of the Central Powers, and carrying out the Armenian Genocide.

Urartu TH

Please give us an explanation. Thanks.Urartu TH (talk) 06:40, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's pretty simple. It's already in the "sections" of the page, it is already mentioned within the context of World War I. I don't know why you feel the need to "protect" this, other than the fact that your name is Urartu and you feel that as an Armenian utlranationalist (Urartu's are ancient Armenians), you must include this on any Turk-related articles. It isn't necessary to consistently repeat it throughout the page of any Turk-related article. There is ALREADY a whole section of it on the Young Turks page. So why insist on deleting my information which is much more informative and inserting your information which already has it's own section below? Finally, Taner Akcam is not a very valid citation, as he has a conflict of interest with the Turkish government and has even denied the fact that Armenians ever rebelled or fought the Ottomans. Cite someone less biased, an Armenian historian perhaps. Be nice and don't revert what I write, modify it if you must, but reverting it is insulting and childish. You don't need to cause an edit war when you can simply modify the information to discuss the Armenian genocide. — talk § _Arsenic99_ 17:52, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Let's get one thing out of the way, I am not attempting to delete any information. You may ADD information if you wish and if it's relevant to the article, but deleting the information that was already in the article is problematic. I'm not even going to touch your ethnic attacks against me. I'm a contributor to various topics and in no way an "ultra-nationalist." You are the one attempting to delete any mention of the Armenian Genocide from the introduction. Taner Ackam is a respected scholar worldwide. The Turkish government, which is in denial over the Armenian Genocide doesn't appreciate his cander, along with the openness to Armenian Genocide recognition by members of the German Bundestag of Turkish descent. Genocide denial by the Turkish government cannot be an adequate reason for whitewashing articles about the perpetrators of the Genocide.
As to an "edit war", you are deleting information about the Armenian Genocide which has been a part of the article for a long time and is well cited, without first discussing those changes in the talk page. You must refrain from such behavior until a proper discussion has been had in the community here. The Armenian Genocide was one of the most note-worthy (if not the most noteworthy) action taken by the Young Turks and is what they are largely remembered for by many people. The CUP took control of the Young Turks and committed the Genocide thereafter. This is integral historical information. If you are questioning the source of this information, I think you'll need to give the community better reasoning than the fact that the Turkish government takes issue with his work. Your actions here are blatant vandalism in violation of WP:VD. Urartu TH (talk) 21:51, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop deleting relevant information as that is a violation of WP:VD and blatant vandalism, to insert a repetition of the same information on a topic that already has the information you stated in the body of the page. It is very clear from your username, that you care a lot about your ethnicity, but that does not give you the authority to constantly delete information in favor of information that is ALREADY in the article's body. Here's what the user Urartu TH has deleted:
Information in Question
which led to a full-scale invasion of mainland Turkey by the Russian, French, and British forces leading to the Ottoman Empire's surrender in 1918.
Again I respectfully ask that you stop deleting relevant information and including information in a redundant manner at the top because of your belief system. What I deleted is already in the article, it isn't vandalism. What you deleted is not in the article and is actual vandalism. Please stop "undoing" and "edit warring" something that isn't in the article in favor of repeating over and over again what you want people to read. "Taner Ackam" (his name is actually Taner Akcam), is not a very well-respected scholar, in fact, he is the least credible source having been in Turkish prison to be using for this topic. There are other Armenian historians who are more credible that you can cite. — talk § _Arsenic99_ 20:43, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Do you actually think anyone is going to take you seriously here? You are the one who deleted the information in question that I mentioned above only to add other information. You may add other information if you wish but the information in question about the Armenian Genocide is a summary as a significant part of the article. This is what the introduction is for. If you continue to delete mentions of the Armenian Genocide from the introduction I will have to move towards having this page locked. Furthermore, if you are attempting to "add something that isn't a part of the article", then it should first be added to the body. The introduction is a summary of the article. Taner Ackam is a respected Turkish scholar. As I said earlier, what you are doing is blatant vandalism and must stop now. Urartu TH (talk) 10:43, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No need to be so childish. Stop vandalizing the page or else this page will be locked. You are DELETING INFORMATION. That is a violation of WP:VD. You are the one deleting the information and linking to something already within the article. Why do you need to repeat links over and over again? It's just bad writing. Again: stop vandalizing and deleting information from the article that better summarize the article. You are reducing the quality of the article, as we can see from the previous edits you've done on the page, your only relation to this article is to talk about Armenians. — talk § _Arsenic99_ 16:59, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you understand how Wikipedia works. The introduction is meant to summarize the body. You started on your deletion crusade with this edit and I've asked you to explain why you wish to remove any mention of the Armenian Genocide from the introduction which summarizes part of the body with irrelevant information and the only answer you've given is that "it's repetition" and "it's biased." Neither of these is true. Urartu TH (talk) 19:40, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well this thread is as insightful as the rest of the article as I feel it speaks of the level of feelings involved in these issues. Satyris410 (talk) 20:48, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Page should be locked. Anti-Genocide revisionists continue to whitewash

[edit]

Lock it down. Authors are continuing to whitewash the Young Turks' responsibility for the Armenian Genocide. It is proven, there are many witnesses (Wikipedia even has a page full of witness testimony). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:443:1:2A00:0:0:0:E706 (talk) 18:18, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2003

[edit]

The info on the Young Turks is pretty much included in the Ottoman Empire#Internal Collapse section, but enough pages link to Young Turks including the afforementioned section that I decided to make a separate article. Perhaps someone will add more info. Also the section mentioned also has a link to Committee of Union and Progress which is the official name of the Young Turks. I don't know which article will have to redirect to which one. Dori 06:02, 5 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I read that some of the Salonika Young Turks were Donmeh (some Daud Pasha?). How does this match with the accusations of mistreatment of minorities? How did the YT treat the Donmeh? --Error 02:07, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Be cautious reading old British Foreign Office stuff. They were convinced at the beginning that the Young Turks were being manipulated by Jews, etc etc. See A Peace to End All Peace .Wetman 02:46, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)
I read it in Farewell España, a divulgation of Sephardic history by a Jewish historian, but I may have misremembered the details.
--Error 01:39, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

To Coolcat: First, factual accuracy disputes must be substantiated on the talk page. Specific points, more precise than "Its full of opinions than facts", are necessary. Second, the allegation (placed at the top of the article, alas) that this is "a sub article of Armenian Genocide article" clearly demonstrates the truth of your statement that you are not knowledgeable enough to fix it. Since you admit to lacking knowledge of the subject, I ask that you refrain from editing the article until you gain that knowledge. —Charles P. (Mirv) 23:02, 22 Feb 2005 (UTC)

NPOV tag at top of article

[edit]

For some reason several editors have been acting together to keep any mentioned of the genocide section out of the introduction. I have added an NPOV tag to the top of the article and it should remain until the genocide section is described in the introduction, like it should be.--79.97.222.210 (talk) 20:33, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wow you can actually use a talk page, pity you don't see able to elsewhere. Make mention of it in a proper way on its own in the lede, properly sourced and free from your activism and political bias and the edit might stand in some form or another. However I'd suggest proposing it HERE on the TALK page to prevent more disruptive editing on the article. Mabuska (talk) 22:41, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, a disruptive IP editor who ignores everyone else making frequent reverts and POV pushing, making a demand that sounds likes a threat ("I have added an NPOV tag to the top of the article and it should remain until the genocide section is described in the introduction, like it should be.") is not how we do things on Wikipedia. This site is a collaboration. If you can't accept the fact no-one agrees with your edit then that is your problem. But as I said already... propose an addition that addresses the problems raised and it might stand. Funny you added that tag anyways seeing as most of your edits would make that tag applicable to those articles. Mabuska (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Young Turks. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:07, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Greece

[edit]

Should we add stuff about the Greek genocide also? it isn't mentioned on the page at all. One insect...no links... (talk) 20:32, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add Cenk Uygur to prominent Young Turks section?

[edit]

Should we add Cenk Uygur to the list of prominent Young Turks as he popularizes and adheres to Young Turk ideological positions, and brings awareness to the movement? 203.46.132.214 (talk) 07:05, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He may subscribe to some ideological positions that appear similar, but it just doesn't make sense to do that. The movement has enormous historical importance but is no longer existent. It would be like calling a current politician a Whig. 91.75.118.50 (talk) 23:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Young_Turks&oldid=1234742826"