Wikipedia:Peer review/Name of Turkey/archive1
Name of Turkey[edit]
I've listed this article for peer review because I'm going to attempt to make this a feutured article. This article grew from a partially developed stub into a full-blown study on the historical development of Turkish nationhood. Please actually read the article to give your final judgment. If it is not yet a candidate for this week, it will be, from the way it is being developed. Wish it the best of luck.
I was referred here by a team member from "Feature Articles". Thank you very much. Bestlyriccollection (talk)
- Hi. It's a good piece of work that has one enormous flaw - it is almost entirely unreferenced. Try going through the article and every time the article claims something ("Many groups speaking "Turkic" languages never adopted the name "Turk" as self identity." or "There is no doubt regarding the etymology of the name "Fu Lin"..." for example) ask yourself "Says who?" If you like, I can do it for you by adding a bunch of {{cn}} tags. Any other shortcomings are so massively outweighed by this one that it's not worth discussing them at this stage, because currently there's nothing to stop people from assuming 99% of the content is OR. Which is isn't. --Dweller (talk) 15:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Important sources of reference include: 1) Fuat Mehmet Koprulu's "Origin of the Ottoman Empire", discussing the formation of Anatolian Beyliks by Turkmen tribes around the Seljuq-Ilkhanid times. 2) Hugh and Nicole Pope: "Turkey Unveiled", talking about how multiethnic Ottoman Empire became "Turkey". 3) there is a book I've read that talks about the Karakhanid period reinvention of the identity "Turk" from a Pagan tribal-dynastic identity into a Muslim collective cultural identity similar to "Tajik". Maybe it is Hugh Pope. 4) Peter Mansfield, "the Arabs", talking about the formation of the "Arab Nationality" during late Ottoman period. Of course, one must look into books that deal heavily with the subjects of Namik Kemal, Ziya Gokalp, Ataturk's Republican Reforms, Young Turks, Tekin Alp, Nihal Atsiz etc.
- That's great, but doesn't address my concerns at all. You urgently need to read this section of arguably our most important policy. Without citations in your text, showing where you've got your information from, it can all be dismissed as "Original Research" and aggressive editors may choose to wipe it, which would be a pity. --Dweller (talk) 09:25, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
- Important sources of reference include: 1) Fuat Mehmet Koprulu's "Origin of the Ottoman Empire", discussing the formation of Anatolian Beyliks by Turkmen tribes around the Seljuq-Ilkhanid times. 2) Hugh and Nicole Pope: "Turkey Unveiled", talking about how multiethnic Ottoman Empire became "Turkey". 3) there is a book I've read that talks about the Karakhanid period reinvention of the identity "Turk" from a Pagan tribal-dynastic identity into a Muslim collective cultural identity similar to "Tajik". Maybe it is Hugh Pope. 4) Peter Mansfield, "the Arabs", talking about the formation of the "Arab Nationality" during late Ottoman period. Of course, one must look into books that deal heavily with the subjects of Namik Kemal, Ziya Gokalp, Ataturk's Republican Reforms, Young Turks, Tekin Alp, Nihal Atsiz etc.