Talk:Başkale

Comments

Large town or city?

Anyone know how Baskale would be classified? --Lisa 01:35, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Assyrians, Armenians, Nestorians...

Recently, Chaldean made these changes. Perhaps these are 100% accurate -- I don't know for sure and I don't understand the finer points of differences between ethnic identities in Turkey either. However, it appears most of the original information in this article was sourced from the 1911 Encyclopaedia (consistently considered a reputable resource, although it exhibits quite a different worldview than that of today since it's almost 100 years old). So, why were references to Armenians and Nestorian Christians changed to Assyrians? I just need to know this is not some Assyrian-Armenian edit war. Thank you — Donama 00:45, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I won't contest Chaldean's changing Nestorian to Assyrian, but I assume he was mistaken when he changed Armenian genocide to Assyrian genocide, so I reverted that last change. --Benne ['bɛnə] _(talk) 01:00, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, first off, both genocides occurred after 1911, so the information must have been added by a user. It's pretty simple - Armenians were killed in the Armenian Genocide, Assyrians were killed in the Assyrian genocide. So I believe Chaldean made a mistake. —Khoikhoi 01:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

No I did not mistaken. The "history" paragraph was not taken from Brittanica..it was sourced (did anybody see the source? Did anybody even read the sentence before it? approximately 50 Gawarnai Assyrians by Muslims on 30 October 1914 at Başkale - Assyrians, not Armenians...so Assyrians died, so were going to call it Armenian genocide? No, Assyrian deaths belong under the subject of Assyrian genocide and Armenian dead belongs to Armenian genocide. As for Nestorian..that is another name for the kind of Christians Assyrians adhire. If anybody have any other questions, please let me know. Chaldean 03:15, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you check the source, you'll see that it mentions Armenians being killed. It even says so in the article itself! --Benne ['bɛnə] _(talk) 03:31, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, you can add additional information about other people dying if you like, but that sentence talks about Assyrians dying. If you like, you can add additional information about Armenians dying as well, and then comfrim that being part of the [Armenian genocide]]. Or you can be the Anti-Assyrian that you are and go at another edit war with me. Chaldean 13:50, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Stop with the personal attacks and show me an un-biased source that backs up your claim. —Khoikhoi 17:20, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

You really should start reading more carefully, check out the history of the page before you started editing, and check out the source. --Benne ['bɛnə] _(talk) 20:05, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Benne, your the one that needs to read. The sentence was COPIED and PASTED from the source I provided. Nowhere in the Armenian cited site is Baskale mentioned (at least I didn't see.) So; where going to get information from an Assyrian website about Gewargi Assyrians getting massacred and file it under the Armenian genocide. So, what is the Assyrian genocide page use for? When is it appropriate to mention Assyrian genocide? If, a sentence is stating Assyrians died, and that is not appropriate to link to the wider event of the Assyrian genocide, then when can we??? Chaldean 03:07, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Chaldean, where is the word "Assyrian" here? —Khoikhoi 04:19, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Exactly! That is what I am saying! Where is the word Assyrian or Baskale there? So, then why is this source used? Look at this page, in its first format - "Gawarnai Assyrian" - Are those Armenian people to you? Look at Benne's comments here - how can he say that with a straight face? Chaldean 04:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

This is starting to get confusing. If the source is about the deaths of Armenians in the area, then why would we change it to Assyrian when we don't have a neutral source for the latter?—Khoikhoi 04:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I dint not change anything. Brittanica 1911 was the one that wrote One of many events in the string of tensions which led to World War I was a massacre of approximately 50 Gawarnai Assyrians by Muslims on 30 October 1914 at Başkale as it looks like, according to its first version of this page. Dont ask me how this is possible, but that is what it looks like now. Chaldean 04:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, but it appears that this is the 1911 Britannica article. Apparently User:Lisathurston is the one who wrote the article. I suggest someone email her. —Khoikhoi 04:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

So then the only conclusion is that she got that from the Assyrian page. Ok then if you think its baised, then the sentence should be completly removed (which is what I did, but was rv'd and responded to as if I'm an extremist or something.) Chaldean 04:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

We don't know where she got it from. I'll email her about it. —Khoikhoi 04:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm sorry, but I really think you should get yourself a pair of glasses. The first source provided talks about Armenians, and also about Syrians (a.k.a. Suryāye). Look for Bashkala, not Başkala.

And the following sentence you wrote just does not make sense:

Brittanica 1911 was the one that wrote One of many events in the string of tensions which led to World War I was a massacre of approximately 50 Gawarnai Assyrians by Muslims on 30 October 1914 at Başkale as it looks like, according to its first version of this page.

How can a 1911 encyclopaedia write about an event that happened in 1914? --Benne ['bɛnə] _(talk) 07:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I thought it could have been maybe a late addition since it was a current event. I did not write that sentence about the Assyrians getting killed. I went back to the other link and by the way, when they say Syrians they mean Sureth speaking people, but dont think for a second they are Syriac Orthodox members...because there is no such thing in Hakkari and plus it explains in the beginning what they meant by Syrian Semitic Christian population, variously known as "Nestorians" (from their religion), "Syrians" (from their language) or "Chaldoeans" (from their race).

And so this is what is says about Baskale: The many hundreds (and perhaps some thousands) of Armenians and Syrians in the region of Bashkala have been massacred. So, in essince, both Armenians and Assyrians died in Baskale. So the sentence of One of many events in the string of tensions which led to World War I was a massacre of approximately 50 Gawarnai Assyrians by Muslims on 30 October 1914 at Başkale should not be dismissed. So then, what are we going to do now. I think we should have something like;

One of many events in the string of tensions which led to World War I was a massacre of approximately 50 Gawarnai Assyrians by Muslims on 30 October 1914 at Başkale, as part of the Assyrian genocide. Hundreds more of Armenians of Başkale were later deported and massacred by Turks and Kurds during the Armenian genocide. Chaldean 14:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the email, User:Khoikhoi. Unfortunately I was a bit of a novice wikipedia editor when I started writing this article. I started it purely in response to a list of 1911 encyclopaedia articles that were not yet started in Wikipedia at the time. So I did get most of the information from the 1911 article, because this is a topic I knew nothing about -- and still know VERY little. I wasn't properly aware of the Wikipedia rules about verifiability and citing sources when I did this too and so I can only imagine I tried to add more up to date information to the article by googling on baskale and bashkala. Considering there's no verifiable source for what I wrote - or if there was I don't remember it - I suggest what I originally wrote be discounted and deleted. And hopefully User:Chaldean and User:Benne can collaborate to rewrite a history section from scratch since they know about this topic. Lisa 01:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Sourced text

This text has been removed twice by Makalp:

Armenians of Başkale were later deported and massacred by Turks and Kurds during the Armenian genocide.[1]

The source is Viscount Bryce's The Treatment of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire. It says:

The news that comes to us from across the Turkish border is far from pleasant. The many hundreds (and perhaps some thousands) of Armenians and Syrians in the region of Bashkala have been massacred. The Armenians and Kurds in and about Van have begun to fight.

...

Yesterday I assembled about fifty Armenians from the neighbourhood of Bashkala...They feel certain that their wives and children have been massacred or else taken away to a captivity worse than death.

I think the text is clearly supported by the source. Unless Makalp can bring reasoned argument here to counter this, I believe the text, so sourced, should remain. — Gareth Hughes 22:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I am dismayed by this set of edits by Makalp. The user decided to remove the text again in the middle of an extensive rewrite. I have attempted to incorporate useful portions of the rewritten article with those parts of the old that this user deleted. It is not acceptable to edit in such a manner. Why hasn't this user even bothered to use this talk page? — Gareth Hughes 18:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Gareth. This user does remove sourced information, constituting vandalism, spewing anti-Armenian racism across wiki. He thinks he can do as he wants and very reluctantly works on editing with others.Hetoum I 01:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Inclusion of the Armenian Genocide section

I have protected the article due to the edit war over the inclusion of the sentence about treatment of Armenians. The section is solely based on an electronic version of 1916 primary document (report of the British secretary of state). There are a few problems with the document as a source:

• WP:RS does not recommend to use primary sources. As a rule wiki should use modern academic secondary and tertiary sources. Usage of primary sources is allowed only as exceptions
• The electronic document is from a personal account. There might be some sort of altering of the document
• As I understand User:Makalp, there are some obvious factual errors in the document.

I have protected the article for a week. Please use this time to do some research. Alex Bakharev 11:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Can the supporters of the inclusion of the phrase find some modern sources to refer the phrase?

Can the opponents provide some analysis showing the errors in the document?

If there would be no consensus over the reliability of the sources can we edit the phrase to state it not as a fact but as a personal opinion of Viscount Bryce? Alex Bakharev 11:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Can you please take a look at User:Makalps contributions, especially the articles that touch on Armenian or Kurdish issues. He's been removing sourced information, disregarding any kind of discussion, and just plain vandalizing Wikipedia. VartanM 15:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he does have a habit of doing this. Also, can he tell us what is wrong with the given source and record? Its pretty well known and used :).Hetoum I 19:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

It's nice to see that Alex Bakharev is displaying the ignorance and arrogance that is a requirement for a Wikipedia administrator. Keep up the good work.Meowy 00:57, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

And of course the ignorance of the typical Wikipedia editor is often beyond belief. Either moronic propagandists (spewing out Turkish lies), or one source wonders (who think they are experts just by quoting from Bryce). Articles like this one are so full of errors that one often feels what's the point of trying to correct them. Meowy 01:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

For the record, I have informed Meowy (talk · contribs) that the above constitutes a personal attack against another user. This user has some history of incivility and may be blocked following another such demonstration. — Gareth Hughes 13:15, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Amongst their many other sins, is the one where Wikipedia administrators state the blindingly obvious as if it were a great insight on their part. A personal insult was exacly what I intended my comment to be. Meowy 19:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Occupation by Armanian militia

Are there any sources for the phrase:

Başkale was occupated by Armenian militias by the support of Russian army at 02 December 1915 for a three years. During the socialist revolt, Russian army was withdrawed back with the armenian militias and then at 22 April 1918 Turkish militias took control of the city.

Please do not insert until sources are provided Alex Bakharev 21:46, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Dear Alex Bakharev.

Armenian land that was populated by Armenians since Roman era to 1923 CANNOT BE OCCUPATED by Armenians. Most likely it was LIBERATED. 178.78.135.48 (talk) 21:47, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

If Başkale was populated by Armenians during the 3 years in question (late 1915 until 1918), it doesn't necessarily follow that it was "occupied" by Armenian militia. "Occupation" in the military sense means to hold military control over. So, since this is in dispute, provide a reliable reference. Surely it can't be that hard to find. Donama (talk) 01:06, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

??? =

Başkale (Kurdish: Elbak, Armenian: Albayrak, and alternatively rendered as Bashkala or Pashgala)

How could it be. Albayrak is also Turkish. Which means Red Flag. Turks use Albayrak also for Turkish Flag.

"Albayrak" is derived from the original name of the district, "Aghbak". Meowy 18:02, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Recent changes re Armenian genocide viewpoint

I reverted the recent changes as none were sourced and they were of poor technical quality. Hints to me that this article needs more work though from the perspective of its Armenian history. Single POV edits like those I reverted are unhelpful though. Donama (talk) 03:45, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Başkale. 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/20140407080817/http://www.triposo.com/loc/BaC59Fkale/history to http://www.triposo.com/loc/BaC59Fkale/history

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 06:09, 29 October 2016 (UTC)