Talk:Mahfiruz Hatun

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 23:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Mahfiruz Hatice Sultan
She was a circassian descendant of Mahidevran sultan and Halime Sultan

The Ottoman Dynasty didn't married there own cousins at this Time, but Mahfiruz Hatice Sultan was the great grand-daughter of Mustafa Pasha, Mahidevran's brother.

Nonsense
I see there is a person retrivertalk who made false statemants about the Ottman Sultans Mothers and consorts. Always this person wrote that some Valides and other wifes are related together. Nonsense. In the Harem the woman was not related, because this was the reason that the Ottoman Sultans invited slave girls without noble background and not native born Muslims. Mahidevran, Mahfiruz, Handan, Hatice etc, had nothing to do together no relatives. Only since the last Ottoman Sultans, circassian and other caucasian noble girls was married with Sultans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nalanidil (talk • contribs) 16:00, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

what the sources say
Can you be more precise? Shaw stated she was Greek, which is refuted by Tezcan (probably among others) which says the only thing we know about Osman's mother is that she seems to have died by 1610 and her probable name. The exhibition catalog is not a reliable source and is redondant as it only reproduces Meram.--Phso2 (talk) 15:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Could you show me the quote from Shaw (1976)? Turcica (2007) refutes it. How do you know it "reproduces" Meram?--Z oupan 15:23, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes Turcica (2007)=Tezcan refutes Shaw's account (seemingly ultimately based on the novel cited by Tezcan, but Shaw doesn't cite his source) that she was Greek, that is what I said. The quotation is "...Trained in Latin, Greek, and Italian by his Greek mother...". The exhibition catalog makes the same strange claims that the controversial and non-academic "Padişah anaları" by Meram (among others, that Suleyman's mother was a Polish Jew name Helga and other fringe theories e.g.), therefore it is very likely based on it; anyway this catalog is not a reliable source.--Phso2 (talk) 15:51, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Not good enough. I've added a secondary source about Shaw.--Z oupan 20:09, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It is unclear who you are citing and how you identify the sources. You are also adding unwanted annotations. You misidentified at least one reference. Please list the references you want to add here, with quotes.--Z oupan 21:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, you just added Shaw, which is refuted.--Z oupan 21:21, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * What reference did I "misidentified"? I didn't "add Shaw", I gave the reference where this outdated view is to be found (your or KB's reverts readded the "quotation needed" for Shaw that I filled, by the way). You are yourself citing Shaw as a reference for the sentence "The earlier theory of her being Greek has been refuted".--Phso2 (talk) 21:31, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * 2)You also re-added the painting exhibition catalogue as a source. Do you really take this as a RS?
 * 3)You deleted the references to Peirce (about the privy purse registers e.g.) although they are accessible online. Did you read the relevant page?
 * 4)What exactly do you call "unwanted annotations"?
 * I propose :

Her date of death and role during her son's reign have been progressively reassessed by scholars. Earlier accounts including Stanford J. Shaw's History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey: Volume 1 described her as teaching Latin, Greek, and Italian to her son and to have assumed the role of Valide Sultan for him. This was challenged by Leslie Peirce (1993) who, while assuming Mahfiruz was alive when her son Osman was finally enthroned in 1618, asserted that she did not live in the imperial palace during his reign nor acted as a Valide Sultan; this was deduced from the absence of the mention of a Valide Sultan in privy purse registers during Osman's reign, and from the indication that from the middle of 1620, Osman's governess began to receive an extraordinary large stipend, an indication that she was now the official stand-in for the Valide Sultan. According to Peirce it seemed likely that Mahfiruz fell into disfavour, was banished from the palace at some point before Osman's accession, and never recovered her status as a royal consort. Howewer according to Baki Tezcan (2007) there are evidences that strongly suggests that she died at latest by 1610, while Osman was about five years old, thus making these hypothesis unnecessary.
 * Please point clearly what part seems problematic to you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phso2 (talk • contribs)

First you misidentified Meram, and tagged him dubious without backing it up. You also claimed that Semiramis is an exhibition catalogue and dubious without backing it up, removing it. Shaw was there before, not added by me, I added the quotation needed, then the secondary source. You then moved the statement about evidence on -1610 death to the bottom. The annotations are unneeded.--Z oupan 22:04, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Done some changes. There was direct copyvio from Peirce. It is now clear that there are two main views, that she died before 1610, and 1620. If you have Tezcan elaborating on this, add more, and properly cite Peirce.--Z oupan 22:29, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * To explain my edit, I restored this source; Günseli İnal and Semiramis Arşivi, Semiramis: Sultan'ın gözünden şenlik, since it was removed without explanation. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:50, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Meram is a journalist/author, not an academic scholar, this is not misidentification. The name "Öz Yayınları" which looks like a publishing house for his books means..."self published" in Turkish. What is your backing up to identify him as a reliable source? It's too simple to patch up snippets from anywhere and then call others "problematic". You didn't add this source, nor "Semiramis", but you revert again and again when I search to give to present the sources with the weight they deserve and you put again the Shaw reference at a place where it contradicts itself. This is not specifically constructive. The date of death statement should be placed where her death is discussed, this is not something so strange, is it?--Phso2 (talk) 22:57, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Consensus??
@Zoupan We needed consensus if I had removed a reliable source or a well-sourced paragraph or sentence without any discussion. But as you can see, all of those sentences are tagged with "unreliable source" template and as none of the other users were able to find a single source for them, thus they must be removed as we can't provide information that are possibly wrong on Wikipedia and they can't stay there forever. Keivan.f Talk 10:51, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Repetitive addition of unsourced content
Today's changes by the | current avatar of "the dynamic ip editing Ottoman harem related articles" will be reverted because:
 * some parts are unsourced
 * some parts are sourced with a personal blog, i.e. not a reliable source
 * some parts are both unsourced or poorly sourced AND contradict reliable sources
 * some parts have seen their content viciously changed while the reliable source was kept, giving the illusion of a properly sourced content when it is not.--Phso2 (talk) 17:43, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 January 2017
Her full name is Valide Mahfiruz Sultan. This page's name is wrong. Her reign is 26 Şubat 1618 - 28 Ekim 1620 as Valide Sultan. She isnt Hatun. She is cassasian princess. Source http://ahmetsimsirgil.com/ii-osman-hanin-sahsiyeti/ 5.47.211.115 (talk) 07:27, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting comment.svg Note: Marking this as answered as the IP editor posted a duplicate request below with a registered account. st  170  e  12:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No, Mahfiruz was never Valide Sultan and there are many proofs of this, one of them is at least that Sultan Osman did not take his mother from the old palace. In general, Mahfiruz could already be dead by this time. 109.252.220.135 (talk) 16:13, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 January 2017
I reported earlier. She is Valide Mahfiruz Sultan. not mahfiruz hatun. Page's name is absolutely wrong. You can look other language of this page. Sulmerruhtan (talk) 07:22, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: I can't read Turkish but I've read your source and I did see the name that you sourced, but I'm going to reject this edit request. I've checked other languages on Wikipedia and they seem to have variations of this name but I can't see one with 'Valide'. The sources on this page backup the name that is used, so what I would recommend is for you to have a discussion on the talk page and invite other editors to discuss it with you (who are experts in the area). Best regards, st  170  e  12:13, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * @St170e I just wanted to say thank you as you absolutely did the right thing. The fact that she was a Valide Sultan is disputed. Unfortunately many IPs and newcomers are interested in creating fictional stories about Ottoman women rather than presenting the historical facts. If anyone wants to move the page, he must give a request. I think you also agree with me. Keivan.f  Talk 12:29, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Mahfiruz's title
Wasn't her title Kadin, not Hatun? 83.28.230.71 (talk) 19:00, 28 February 2017 (UTC)