Talk:Hatay State

Population numbers and percentages
The article said "Hatay was mostly Turkish" but the link pointed to some text saying "Arabs then constituted about two-thirds of the population of Hatay (known to the Arabs as Alexandretta), and the province has remained predominantly Arab".

We need to develop a "Population numbers and percentages" section at various stages of Hatay history. For example, 2. After the rioting started between the Turks and Arabs 3. After the Turks took over and the Armenians fled 4. Before and after the alleged Turkish electoral fraud LookTwice 06:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

As for electoral fraud, this from a translated French wiki page,  "Since 1936, Turkey had let know that it would not accept only this territory where an important Turkish minority saw passes under the control of an independent Syrian State. The confrontations multiply between the two parties, and Turkey encourages the installation of Turks in the area. The elections of May 20 1937 show with the SDN that 47 percent of the population are Turkish. Consequently, by various Ankara stratagems gets busy to make assemble this percentage to 55 percent, in particular by the violence or of the transfers of population."  And for the Armenians, "Following that more than 5.000 Armenians (remain only the Armenians of the village of Vaklifi) as well as many other Christians, as well Arab as Assyrian, take the way of the exile, leaving behind them all that they had."

LookTwice 06:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)


 * By the way, Ottoman Empire lost many territories due to this "fraud" chain (minority rights-autonomy-independence). For example, Serbia (First Serbian Uprising, Second Serbian Uprising, Treaty of Berlin) is a good example. Hatay was the last project of Mustafa Kemal, after it became clear that Turkey lost Western Thrace, Batum and Mosul. It would be harsh to call the "Hatay Problem" a carbon copy of Hitler's style. Deliogul 11:49, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

to colony or not to colony
1 - "Syria became a French colony". In fact, it was the French Mandate of Syria and was named as "Syria" after the League of Nations mandate was established.. 2 - "Hatay was mostly Turkish populated". The name "Hatay" appeared with the proclamation of Hatay Republic. The name of the territory was Sanjak of Alexandretta. Turks were the most populous community according to 1938 census but they were not the majority. 3 - "referendum was held in Hatay about joining to Turkey, and the majority of Hatay people voted for joining". There was no referendum held. The decision of joining Turkey was taken by the Turkish members of Hatay Assembly. 4 - Furthermore, "it was given to Turkey". How can it be "given to Turkey" if a referendum is held and the people vote in favour of joining Turkey?

This article is a mess!
It starts with a wrong naming of the Turkish name: Turkish for "Republic of Hatay" is not "Hatay Devleti" but "Hatay Cumhuriyeti". It deems it as a "Turkish" state, but I thought it (in fact) kept a multi-ethnic structure. The better (!), "Turkish" refers to the article Turkey. Furthermore, it names the province of Hatay as a district. This is only the first paragraph and the remainder is no better. Behemoth 01:06, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I added Sanjak of Alexandretta to intro section and also changed Hatay State and Hatay Devleti to its original form, which is Republic of Hatay. So i think, main objections can be winthdrawn? Can I now take factual accuracy tag away? Ateshi - Baghavan 20:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way, I added, new section called background, so i think factual accuracy tag now can be removed. Ateshi - Baghavan 21:52, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

French Flag!
I think Syria was a League of Nations mandate-State (Class A) has a flag, police, national assembly, president and some other degree of sovereignty (although under mandate) according to Treaty of Versailles, Conference of Sanremo and the Franco-Syrian Treaty of Independence (1936) by that time Hatay get in the process of being a state then ceded to Turkey. Should someone replace the French flag with the National Syrian flag used from 1925 to 1938? Ralhazzaa 15:00, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * As Syria had several flags prior to hatay's incorporation to Turkey, and one of them, the flag of 1936 must be used in this particular case, but it is different from Syria's flag today, and I don't know wheter there is an icon for that flag in wikipedia, so if someone could create that icon, then OK. Ateshi-Baghavan 20:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Someone must change the name of this article to Sanjak of Alexandretta!!! Hatay was the name the Turks gave it after the occupation began. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.227.151.227 (talk) 22:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

God occupation....cry me a river. Tugrulirmak (talk) 16:09, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Four or five
According article ...divided into four districts (Antakya, İskenderun, Ordu (Yayladağı), Kırıkhan and Reyhaniye (Reyhanlı). Seems that there's one exceding district, or must be five--83.56.237.47 (talk) 18:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Flag
This is fake:

This is the real flag:

See this source: The life and career of a Turkish diplomat, Cevat Açıkalın, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Turkey, 2002: "The flag of the new state was modelled after the Turkish flag. The slight modification was that, while the star on the Turkish flag is a solid white against a red background, the star on the Hatay flag was only a white outline" --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 23:00, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

may be modified edition of the flag in the movie Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade. Emin değilim ama... Takabeg (talk) 00:18, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

incomplete
I just passed by this article from İskenderun and noticed no mention of the army expelling Arabs and the rigged referendum. I have tagged one section as incomplete. It needs expanding if it is to serve as a main article for the section İskenderun. -84user (talk) 21:16, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

40 centuries
I deleted "in conformity to the Turkish History Thesis." "In truth, the Turks first appeared in Anatolia during the 11th century when the Seljuk Turks occupied the eastern province of the Abbasid Empire and captured Baghdad." sentences because whoever wrote these doesn't have any idea about the use of "40" in Turkish.

When Mustafa Kemal said Hatay is Turkish for 40 centuries, he didn't mean 4000 years, he meant a long time.Just like when we say "It would never come to my mind even if i thought 40 years" we don't actually mean 40 years but a long time.There are many examples of use of 40 in Turkish expressions about time.Besides Turkish History Thesis doesn't exist in 1923. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Animvader (talk • contribs) 05:36, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * This should be added with a source than. --Forsytor (talk) 19:44, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hatay State. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130903134742/http://www.historyoftruth.com/ebook/kitab20110130094307919.pdf to http://www.historyoftruth.com/ebook/kitab20110130094307919.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:24, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Necessity of Mareşal in Background section Comment
When describing Ataturk, is the preface of Mareşal necessary? In most Western parlance I tend to come across him mentioned as Mustafa Kamal or Ataturk. However I'm not particularly knowledgeable of the histography of the region in this time period so do not wish myself to remove it. Kind Regards, NotAnotherNameGuy (talk) 06:55, 11 March 2022 (UTC)