Talk:Dissolution of the Ottoman Empire

Overview map
This article could use a map that shows the losses of territory over the period in question. The closest I could find was File:Map-of-Ottoman-Empire-1900.png, which shows losses from 1878 to 1900. -- Beland (talk) 00:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Naming scheme
Throughout the article the United Kingdom is referred to as "Great Britain", a name they didn't have post the Act of Union in 1800. I have edited this to be historically correct. Taear (talk) 02:12, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Uncommented reverts, weasel words, stalking
most academics" is a weasel word and so is "facing the executors" they were shot to death, not tried and then executed --Oguz1 19:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I changed "most" to "some" per [Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Claims_of_consensus] andbut left he sentence, for now. But it should be removed per [Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary.2C_secondary.2C_and_tertiary_sources] and the fact that it is out of context.  --Oguz1 18:20, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality
Portions of this article don't seem especially neutral, particularly where the Amerneian Genocide seems to simply mention deportations and not killings. Also at the begining of the article there's comments about the Ottoman Army being corrupt. I put a citation tag there. Perhaps some can go over this article a little more completely than I can at present? Wilybadger 23:20, 19 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I have gone through about half of the article so far trying to remove non-neutrality. There was also a very obvious anti-Albanian slant in the article which I got rid of. This article, for being such an important topic, still needs a lot of work. I'm surprised it's only rated minor importance in the Turkey category, but that's neither here nor there. Candidesgarden (talk) 10:37, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite
This article needs major revision. It conveys little useful information, has poor syntax, and has terrible tone. I have flagged it for cleanup, and am currently working on a cleaner version of the entire article. There are parts where previous editors have made absolutely no sense with what seems to be frivolous information. I have commented these parts out, so someone with greater knowledge can possibly see something I may have missed. Candidesgarden (talk) 08:40, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * This article is part of a series... Not an article by itself.... There is no meaning to copy the History of Crete to this article. --TarikAkin (talk) 15:18, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I have now rewritten the article up to "Before the War, 1914". I will get to the rest soon. Candidesgarden (talk) 09:49, 17 May 2008 (UTC)


 * This article is about "dissolution of Ottoman Empire" (between 1908-1922). There were millions of events happened this period. Not just with Greeks. Greek point of view of this (1908-1922) period is covered in Greek history. Also, if you want to give details each event the Ottoman Empire involved this article become bigger than any other article in wikipedia. You should look at size limitations at the wikipedia. That is the main reason why there is a Ottoman history series. The appropriate way to explain details is to use A SUB-article. Such as History of Crete. In your edits you rewrite Ottoman history beginning with 1700s. This is wrong, for this article, as only covers a specific period. Also You did a COPY_PASTE (This is also violation of WP:FORK) on the history regarding the Crete and Balkan Wars. The information regarding the "Ottoman Empire"s position between 1908-1922 is not only appropriate, also fits the purpose of the article. This is not a POV, as you think. The position in question is shared in WP:Summary Style. --TarikAkin (talk) 15:25, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Larger schemes of political control
Quoting from the article, subsection Capitulations & Public Debt: "Ottoman public debt was part of a larger schemes of political control, through which the commercial interests of the world had seek to gain advantages that may not be to Empire's interest." This sounds like conspiracy theory talk. The Empire voluntarily took the loans it could not pay back later. --Lambiam 07:40, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Merger
I am wondering if this article should be merged with Abolition of the Ottoman Sultanate, which is fairly long and contains information about this page's section Question of the Sultanate. DCI2026 (talk) 00:46, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Support If I understand correctly, the Ottoman Sultanate is basically the same thing as the Ottoman Empire. I've tagged both articles. Brandmeistertalk  14:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Support. --92slim (talk) 14:27, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose The Ottoman Sultanate and the Caliphate was abolished by Kemalist Turkey, after the events detailed in this article. This article deals with the decline and end of the Ottoman Empire. The sultanate was a different institution from the Ottoman Empire. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:22, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose, the two articles are not coterminous. This article is about the disintegration and dissolution of a multi-national empire, a rather long process involving multiple actors and by no means predestined to lead to the end of the Ottoman dynasty's rule; the abolition of the sultanate itself is but the final symbolic act of this process, resulting from the whole sequence of events detailed here. Constantine  ✍  19:01, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This article is already too long and we should seek opportunities to move material to other new or existing articles. Jim.henderson (talk) 12:31, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * weak oppose, This article is already too long, we don't need to make it even longer. Coolman207ee (talk) 14:18, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 10 June 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 04:03, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Defeat and dissolution of the Ottoman Empire → Dissolution of the Ottoman Empire – More concise and natural title Seraphim System  ( talk ) 10:27, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Support per nomination and per other such main headers (Dissolution of the Soviet Union or Breakup of Yugoslavia). The current title appears to have taken its form from the various Decline and Fall (disambiguation) titles.   Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 19:15, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Support Rreagan007 (talk) 20:01, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:31, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * AsiaMinor1910.jpg

Weird words in intro?
In the intro paragraph, the following sentence exists: Instead, this period became the story of the twilight struggle of the Empire.

Something about this sentence feels off, maybe someone else can make it sound better?

Also, the very next sentence says they suffered a "disastrous defeat". Should the word "disastrous" be removed? -174.141.135.242 (talk) 05:05, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Rewrite needed & systemic bias
As other (ancient) discussions on this talk page pointed out, this article has serious issues that go beyond poor English. I've tagged it as needing a rewrite and as suffering systemic bias in favour of Turkish nationalism, not least because it completely failed to mention minority genocides (I've now added an empty section with a template). It appears to minimise to ethnic tensions, and contains consistent pro-Ottoman and anti-Armenian biases in an non-explicit manner through its selection, exclusion and presentation of facts, and contains frequent contentious claims without any sources. Frankly, it's a strong candidate for WP:TNT, as even the better sections with inline sources suffer from far too much detail. I may come back and nuke it if no editors want to take up the task of improving it up. Jr8825 •  Talk  18:43, 1 August 2021 (UTC)