Talk:Shahan Natalie

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Shahan Natalie article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Shahan Natalie is within the scope of WikiProject Armenia, an attempt to better improve and organize information in articles related or pertaining to Armenia and Armenians. If you would like to contribute or collaborate, you could edit the article attached to this page or visit the project page for further information.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

1 Comments

[edit] Comments

[edit] Sources

I am putting the tags since the only book cited in this article is his own autobiography, please bring in impartial sources in line with WP:BIO, until then the tags will stay. Baristarim 09:59, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

The work cited is not an autobiography. Rather, it is a collection of two essays by Shahan Natalie: "Turkism from Angora to Baku and Turkish Orientation" and "The Turks and Us." The biographical material on Natalie is part of the preface (by a third party) entitled, "A Concise Biography." Serouj 20:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Constantinople or Istanbul

My source says Natalie attended the St. James Orphanage in Constantinople before 1900. The Constantinople article says that the name change to Istanbul occurred in 1930. I see no reason why we need to Turkify the name of Constantinople in 1900 to Istanbul. It seems revision of history to me. Serouj 10:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

??? In fact, to me it seems to me the opposite.. What the hell are we revising here? It is academic concensus that Istanbul refers to the period after 1453, that decree only decreed that from then on ONLY Istanbul could be used. It is like saying Mumbai is the new version of Bombay! Mumbai is the correct form, and it was not renamed such from Bombay: It was decreed that from then on only that name could be used. Is that revision of history too? The name change didn't occur in 1930, it is not like people said "how about we call this city.... ahh.. Istanbul from now on?" It was already Istanbul, that decree only confirmed it.. Gees, no need to nitpick over this, seriously. Your source? What source? There are no sources cited in this article, the only book is his own autobiography.. You can do better than accuse people of "historical revisionism", however throwing around such weighty words will only put the joke on you my fellow.. Baristarim 10:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

It is what it is. The name change occurred in 1930. The official capital of the Ottoman Empire until then was "Constantinople" and I just checked my sources on the Armenian Genocide, and they too refer to the capital by its official name of Constantinople. Serouj 10:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I will try to get back to his discussion later, I have to leave for the moment. Cheers! Baristarim 11:00, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kharpert/Kharberd (Kharput) province

The Kharberd article's History section mentions the villayet of Kharput. This is the right article to be linking to, not the Elazig province article, which does not mention it. I'm not sure why you're trying to erase the word Kharberd or the link to its right article. If you give me a good reason, maybe I might capitulate. Serouj 11:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/h/a/Talk%7EShahan_Natalie_8fa2.html"

Categories: Start-Class Armenian articles | WikiProject Armenia