Draft talk:Re-mosqueing of Hagia Sophia

Merge back in to Hagia Sophia
This needs to be merged into Hagia Sophia. Editor2020 (talk) 16:11, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree, needs to be shortened and merged. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a space for drafts by academic wannabes. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 17:54, 24 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for frank opinions and inputs, but I will be thinking about it only after expanding this one to it's best potential in draft / user space before taking concurring with any opinions.
 * &#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 13:20, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

IMO this is contentious and largely academic. There are other avenues for discussions of this nature. The crust of the subject matter is already covered in Hagia Sophia, which is already a very long article. Yekshemesh (talk) 14:35, 1 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for frank opinions and inputs, but I will be thinking about it only after expanding this one to it's best potential in draft / user space before taking concurring with any opinions.
 * &#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 14:49, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
 * FYI, on the title, the correct terminology for the reconversion of a secular space into a religious space is reconsecration. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

More sources on re-mosqueing
I was unable to assist on the draft of the re-mosqueing of Hagia Sophia due to the lack of time back then. However, today found a Le Figaro article which appears to be tackling on the issue of the re-mosqueing of Hagia Sophia, which came to my attention due to the present draft and I hope it is useful: Turquie: inquiétudes pour Sainte-Sophie, redevenue mosquée par la volonté d’Erdogan. Good day. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ (talk &#9993; &#124; contribs &#9998;) 21:54, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Reconsecration
The right word for re-consecrating a place of worship is just that: 'reconsecration'. See: The Smithsonian; Harvard chap on WAPO. 'Re-mosqueing' is not a word. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Reconversion is closer to the mark, but reconsecration would be more accurate and appropriate. Conversion, in a religious context, tends to imply the movement from one religion to another. The original conversion of the church into a mosque was conversion, obviously. But the move from sacred space to secular space (i.e.: a museum here) is deconsecration, and the reverse is reconsecration. The building went to being a museum, not back to being a church, so reconversion from what? It could sort of mean conversion of the building in the most basic sense (use), but it remains somewhat misleading in a religious context. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:33, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your valuable inputs. It's a very good suggestion and argument but it leaves a question 'reconsecration' as what  (Church or Mosque) unstated.
 * As Alex Corlu study says 'reconsecration as mosque' is only one of multiple identities of the monument and then does it give justice to the fact that once it was Church too and what all the debate is all about. If it would not have been Church in it's one of previous role then there would not have been any debate  discourse and controversy around it. And purpose of the article is to  encyclopedic coverage of related intellectual discourse. So would the title 'reconsecration' give better justice to the article let us wait for more inputs in due course.
 * The main important part is expansion of the article draft as of now. Thanks again for valuable inputs &#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 10:19, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Unreliable sources
A couple of unreliable sources to watch out for that are currently being cited are Turkey's Daily Sabah, and meforum (and the Middle East Quarterly it publishes). Iskandar323 (talk) 11:23, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Academic studies section
Bookku, I have made some initial edits to the draft. I am concerned that the academic sources are not particularly notable, and I'm not convinced that they require this much explanation in the body of the article. Additionally, they are not "academic studies" about the re-mosqueing itself but to the responses to the remosqueing. I can propose some edits to the Hagia Sophia article. Hexcodes (talk) 01:58, 23 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your interest in the article.


 * a) As I discussed and requested on your talk page my primary focus is to promote this draft for " encyclopedic coverage of 'Intellectual discourse relating mosqueing/ re-mosqueing' "


 * b) As long as I get draft expanding contributors I would leave it to them what to include and what not to include to respective contributors. I am more interested in promoting it until topic gets a proper encyclopedic coverage regarding related to 'Intellectual discourse'.


 * May be some of those Turkish academics may not be well known but that gives and idea how Turkish intelligentsia and population articulate and supported the re-mosqueing. And if we let the content there in initial stages of draft, it will give idea to other new draft contributors over all intellectual discourse in Turkey. But certainly I am not insistent about.


 * c) I would like to understand a little more about what do you mean by the difference between '.. Additionally, they are not "academic studies" about the re-mosqueing itself but to the responses to the re-mosqueing. ..'.  So that shall help all of us to improve the draft further.


 * d) If we speak of 'Intellectual discourse' from European and western side seems much muted. As Turkish academia supported re-mosqueing with systematic intellectual discourse, as of now I do not see much intellectual discourse from European and christian side. Please share if any sources if you come across to balance the article properly.

Requesting and looking forward to your contributions for expansion of this draft.

Thanks and warm regards

&#32;Bookku, &#39;Encyclopedias &#61; expanding information &#38; knowledge&#39; (talk) 04:17, 23 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi Bookku, this is useful in understanding your perspective.
 * My point about the academic studies (c)) is that they address the response to the re-mosqueing rather than the decision itself, but perhaps it will be possible to find sources that directly address the decision. Where do you look for Turkish academic works? From some initial reading, it seems that Western (although not necessarily "European and christian") academics are critical of the decision as a political move and potentially concerning to preservationists . Since these are news articles, I'll read more to see if the scholars quoted have published any research works on the topic. Hexcodes (talk) 02:52, 25 June 2022 (UTC)