Talk:Multi-party period of the Republic of Turkey

Comments

Delete

Hi, I've deleted a paragraph, which seems to be out of the context of the page, and probably is put here to start a flamewar.

Below is the text:

In March 2006, riots took place in Diyarbakır, the capital of the Kurdish part of Turkey. The police forces killed ten people. According to Ankara, the disturbs had been commanded by the PKK in order to mobilize again its troops, demoralized since Abdullah Öcalan's 1999 imprisonment. However, economic factors (high unemployment among the Kurdish youths) also explain the tension. In despite of these new events, the situation has changed since the early 1990s, when Diyarbakır was a battle-field between Kurdish militants and the Special Turkish Forces. Prime minister Tayyip Erdoğan has been the first Turkish government leader to recognize the existence of a "Kurdish problem", and has given some new rights to the Kurdish minority. However, sensible questions such as the return of exiles to their villages or amnesty of guerrillas are still on stand-by. Zeki Dogrul , a responsible of the Democratic People's Party (which merged in August 2005 with Leyla Zana's Democratic Society Party), a legal party close to the PKK, declared to the Figaro that "[they are] assisting in a return backwards, with the military deciding instead of the civilians… We want peace, but we understand that the PKK defends itself when the military attacks them".

It did not contain any references, and what I could find about the incident (which has nothing to do with multi-party history of Turkey) is at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4860154.stm.

From what I remembered, Turkish army killed several (10+) PKK terrorists before the events, and riots escalated during the funerals, so police forces had to take action. But I could not find any references to "The police forces killed ten people."

For sake of objectivity, the original author of the text can start another page on the issue. (Though I'm definately no authority here).

Sukru 18:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Analysis

Ok, I'll place my comments here online, and if there is no response, what's the course action can I take?

In March 2006, riots took place in Diyarbakır,

the capital of the Kurdish part of Turkey. --- This is unfortunately a seperatist view, since there is only one capital in a state.

The police forces killed ten people. --- Unfortunately there is no reference to this event (any established international news source would be fine).

According to Ankara, --- Ankara is the capital of Turkey, the statement probably meant "according to offical goverment sources".

the disturbs had been commanded by the PKK in order to mobilize again its troops, demoralized since Abdullah Öcalan's 1999 imprisonment.

However, economic factors (high unemployment among the Kurdish youths) also explain the tension. --- The word explain is used in a definitive manner without any source, as far as I know there is no research on wikipedia.

In despite of these new events, the situation has changed since the early 1990s, when Diyarbakır was a battle-field between Kurdish militants and the Special Turkish Forces. Prime minister Tayyip Erdoğan has been the first Turkish government leader to recognize the existence of a "Kurdish problem", and has given some new rights to the Kurdish minority. --- By official definition, according to Treaty of Lausanne, which bases the foundation of the state of Turkey, only non-Muslim citizens are minorities, and even EU definition does not include Kurdish people of Turkey as minorities.

However, sensible questions such as the return of exiles to their villages --- According to the latest report of progress of accession of Turkey into EU, this problem is already resolved, and around 1500 cases in ECtHR have been dropped.

or amnesty of guerrillas are still on stand-by. --- What's the requirement of amnesty? As far as I know many PKK terrorists surrender to security forces each month, and they're given several rights (including full pardon if did not take part in a combat causing death) during their trials.

Zeki Dogrul , a responsible of the Democratic People's Party (which merged in August 2005 with Leyla Zana's Democratic Society Party), a legal party close to the PKK, declared to the Figaro that "[they are] assisting in a return backwards, with the military deciding instead of the civilians… We want peace, but we understand that the PKK defends itself when the military attacks them" --- Ok, there are some quotes from one side of the conflict has been added. However there is no mention of the name of the "legal party", and there is no source mentioned for the statements of these people.

Finally a bogus (ref='fig') reference is not a reference.

Is this the most recent history page for Turkey?

If it is, why doesn't it include the 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt? And what does it say Erdoğan's rule ended in 2015? Edison (talk) 03:23, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Official name

According to the Turkey article, the official name is Republic of Türkiye, but this article somewhat uses Republic of Turkey. It's like using Greek Republic rather than Hellenic Republic. 177.76.22.139 (talk) 18:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Let the name Türkiye first sink in. We also don't write Deutschland, Sverige or Hrvatska when it is meant to be understood by Englishspeaking people. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:13, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

@Paradise Chronicle: But the official names of those countries use the English names, unlike Turkey's. 177.76.22.139 (talk) 19:24, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I guess it will take quite some years until the journalists, researchers or schools will start to replace Türkyie with Turkey. As long as Turkey is the common name, thats going to stay. We had already five discussions about it as you can see here for January 2022, and here for November 2022. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 19:49, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

@Paradise Chronicle: Can we just replace Republic of Turkey with Republic of Türkiye while keeping Turkey alone? 177.76.22.139 (talk) 20:03, 13 January 2023 (UTC)