Talk:Elâzığ/Archive 1

Archive 1

Armenian citations

I could not find a relation between Elazig and Armenian genocide, which is never accepted by modern Turkish Republic. If you are referring to Armenian sites and historians than you must add similar statements to most of the German+Polish+Italien cities about Holocaust.

I found the sentence as an indication of an anger, which must be related with the writer's possible armenian historical histeria. Armenians betrayed to their state by supporting Russian and French armies against Ottomans. They killed hundreds of thousands of Turkish civilians to justify their population dominancy. What can be the response of a state in 19th century? Armenians are forced to leave to another part of the country. Most of them escaped to France/Australia where they look happy. If they were still in Turkey, they were begging to Europians just to be accepted to EU where most of them are already in now. That is not a genocide but must be an "expulsion". I think the Armenians must understand what they have done is not an acceptable behaviour. If Armenians want to understand what a "genocide" is, then they must read about Holocoust, Holodomor and Ruandan Genocides. Bernard..

What does all of this have to do with the article? If something important happened in this city and it can be cited, it should be noted. --Awiseman 16:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

The anon (residing in Istanbul) who posted that message also made this edit. That info is still in the article, but I have commented it out as it needs a source. —Khoikhoi 17:04, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Elazg is a unofficial Kurdish city

A city which the Kurdish population form the majority.

Source? --Awiseman 19:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Cleaned up

Cleaned up the page, if anybody needs to clarify things, please do, as some was a little hard to understand.

Also, the Catholic Encyclopedia says the kings were Armenian, not Assyrian.[1] --Awiseman 17:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Please keep vandalism away from these pages and do not use here to pour out your hatred.

Where's the vandalism? —Khoikhoi 19:21, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Fix Elazig today section

The Elazig Today section says

"Elazığ is the capital of the Elazığ province. The Armenian Catholic diocese numbers 3000 parishioners, 8 parishes, 6 churches, 3 chapels, 14 stations, and 14 primary schools, chiefly at Kharput-Mezré and Malatia. There are about 72,000 Christians throughout the vilayet, which contains about 600,000 inhabitants. The Armenian Protestants have a large American mission at Kharput, which is the headquarters of all those in Armenia.

Note: The above information is unlikely to be about Elazig today, seeing as all the Armenians of the area were deported in the Armenian Genocide of 1915. The churches and schools written about were destroyed and there would be no community left to fill the 8 parishes written about. Also there are no Armenian Protestants to speak of outside Istanbul, so the notion that they would have a large mission in Elazig is highly suspect. Seeing as Turkey blockades Armenia it would be impossible to have a headquarters for all of Armenia in a separate country that has no contact with it. This "Elazig today" section seems to be talking about a time pre-genocide.[citation needed]"

That needs to be fixed. --Awiseman 18:37, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Kinzer serving and "Azeris in Elazığ"

I think the Stephen Kinzer opus has no place here, perhaps in Harput (to be started), but not here. He is profoundly political, not a historian, and the entire article is based -or rather starts- with the confidences of a certain Tahire Cakirbay, 66. There is an expression in Turkish that goes like "Tying one's affairs to 66" (İşi altmış altıya bağlamak), and it bodes nothing well for whoever does it.

This is from the wiki article on Kinzer, in case anyone does not take the link there:

Kinzer was used as an example of media bias by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky in their book Manufacturing Consent. The authors show that Kinzer fails to quote a single person in Nicaragua who is pro-Sandinista and contrast this with polls reporting a 9% support for all the opposition parties taken together. The authors conclude that such a persistent bias can only be explained by the propaganda model.

As for the population, I could understand if mention of Turks and Zazas and Kurds was made for Elazığ, but Azeris seem outlandish to me. I am sure anyone who must have had Azeri roots in Elazığ can fully be qualified as Anatolian Turks by now (I recall that Azeris are also Turks). I do not know where Lexorient holds that statement, but it seems empty to me (and will seem to anyone who has been to Elazığ). And I thought we were to be careful while citing other encyclopedias. Cretanforever

I think it depends on what the Azeris consider themselves. --Awiseman 19:39, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Ask them! Regards:) Cretanforever

In regards to Kinzer, please see WP:V - The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is thus verifiability, not truth. He appears to be a well-established author and newspaper writer, so it is thus a verifiable source. If you want to counter his views, add appropriately cited material of your own. Feel free to add something from Justin McCarthy, as we did on the Adana article, or something from a Turkish historian or writer if you want. —Khoikhoi 01:28, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Elazığ City no Kürdish. Elazığ of people Zaza and Turkish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.251.128.34 (talk) 04:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Removal of unsourced information

I have removed the sentence A large number of the Gregorian and Protestant Armenian clergy and people were massacred, and churches, monasteries and houses were looted. as unreferenced for almost two years. The information can be readded if a reliable source is cited. Regards, Kafka Liz (talk) 23:34, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Notable redlinks

I think it would be appropriate to remove the redlinks from the "Notable natives" section. These would of course be welcome back once the notability of the individuals had been established by an article. Perhaps members of both Wikipedia:WikiProject Turkey and Wikipedia:WikiProject Armenia could add the redliked names to their respective requested article lists. Are there any objections to my removing the redlinks? Aramgar (talk) 21:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

I just did it. Additionally, I've put the individuals in alphabetical order, which I believe makes more sense than by placing them into Armenian and Turkish lists. The page still needs editing. Ordtoy (talk) 13:01, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Well done. Thanks. Aramgar (talk) 13:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

They were in " Armenian and Turkish lists" because an editor had deleted all the Armenian names. I had reinserted those names but hadn't bothered to merge them into alphabetical order because I had doubts about the validity of some of the names on both lists. Meowy 16:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I had myself attempted earlier to remove the red links [2] and alphabetise the list [3]. I'm glad to have some additional input here. Regarding the "stone age", I've found a couple of good articles on Elâzığ in JSTOR (also a lot of material on early 20th century epidemics; seems there was a lot of cholera there), including one that may support the uncited sentence removed above. I'll post more information when I have it. Cheers, Kafka Liz (talk) 01:19, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

NOTABLES FROM STONE AGE

People, lets only keep the notables from 21st century no need to go back to stone age cause if we do the list will grow for ever. I personally only listed the current notables from elazig i didnt even went back to ottoman era cause i know it will ruin the elazig page, there will be more notables in the page than info about elazig. So lets keep it clean and dont ruin the page. If you people want we could make a page about those past notables from elazig and list them all there then give link from elazig to that page. (Mystery.sin (talk) 12:43, 14 May 2009 (UTC))

Although the abuse of the "notable presidents" section of entries is very common, there isn't any doubt that what you are doing is just POV warring to exclude valid facts that you don't like mentioned. I wonder if there has been any discussion elsewhere about what sort of persons should and should not be included in that section of articles? There are some brief observations here: Wikipedia:Famous_Residents. Meowy 16:32, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I concur with Meowy on this point. Writers of an encyclopedia need to present fair and accurate information, both current and historical. Kafka Liz (talk) 01:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

The notables list is full of old dead farts which aint even notable, the reason they are put in the list is because some happen to born in harput back in the day and the loser armenians here keep vandalising the page with these useless trashs just to make trouble and ruin the nice page. Its freaking unbelievable how one race is so obsessed about us turks and follow us to every freaking place even to the toilet, hey while your at it wipe my ass anyway may god put sense in to your obsessive rusty brains. Much love (Mystery.sin (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 02:50, 16 May 2009 (UTC).

:D Kafka Liz (talk) 04:06, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Dont :D me grand ma you know its true, you armenians are pathetic you dimwits still dream about the so called greater armenia (utopia) lol but becareful you might lose the current armenia while you dream about the greater one, you little internet warriors. (Mystery.sin (talk)) —Preceding undated comment added 14:38, 16 May 2009 (UTC).

:D , and even more :D - but if you want to remain able to edit you are going to need to moderate both your language and your assumptions. Meowy 20:29, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Cool idea! Let's be so Turkish, so proud, and delete anything non-Turkish - in the world! Why only in Elazig!

-- Apocolocynthosis

Alzi > Elazığ?

maybe NOT from Mamuretülaziz! Everyone says: Mamuretülaziz > El Aziz > Elazığ. But the name of this region was "Alzi" at the time of the Hittites. Atatürk changed the name from Elaziz to Elazığ. but why? Elazığ doesn't mean anything! (Maybe the people of this region already called it Elzi /Elzığ which came from the ancient name Alzi!) Böri (talk) 09:46, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

That looks a bit too far-fetched. Diyar-i Bekir turned to Diyarbakir, which has nothing to do with copper (bakir), and some other examples go on. What we only know about this issue is that he changed city names just to erase the memories of Ottoman Sultans, as the government of the time itself declares openly, and applies systematically. The rest is pure speculation. After all, Alzi does not look really similar to Elazig. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.24.168.52 (talk) 21:07, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a source for Wikipedia

Don't add information to wikipedia thats sourced from alternative language wikis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.242.217.79 (talk) 13:57, 17 September 2013 (UTC)