Talk:Sütçü İmam incident

?
Did Ahmet Hulki Saral mention to Çakmakcı Sait ? Takabeg (talk) 10:52, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

On Changed Sections
Previously there was sections 'Turkish Version of Events' and 'Alternate View', but the accounts did not contradict each other. The former French soldier stated the same general events as the Turkish witnesses did: a soldier was drunk, he ripped off a veil, and in the ensuing altercation Imam fired off a shot and killed a soldier (see Kerr, p. 63). By highlighting non-existing differences by section, the framing of the article leads the reader to understand one version as misconstrued from the beginning. WP:NPOV

The former soldier clearly did not elaborate on the same details witnesses gave, or share the same account of the aftermath. But he notably also does not contradict any of these accounts, either, which makes positioning him as an 'alternate' view incorrect.

I understand people hesitate to trust government sources, which is why the more 'disputed' events of the aftermath have been sectioned off and highlighted as government reported. I looked up alternate versions of the events but could not find any directly contradicting either Kadir or the bystander being killed. Dsrlisan85 (talk) 23:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Also feel free to correct/reword. There's not much info out there but there might be a bit I'm missing. Dsrlisan85 (talk) 01:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Where does Kerr verify, for example, the tale of a Turk being tortured and mutilated? KhndzorUtogh (talk) 23:02, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * There is no contradiction of it, and it is placed in the aftermath section highlighted as reported by Turkish sources, not agreed upon. Your revisions were largely unnecessary. Dsrlisan85 (talk) 06:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, the article as you reverted it holds biased language. 'a less dramatic version', for example, is slanted framing. There's no need for that when both accounts can be presented side by side. The armenian legionnaire was not there for the aftermath, as Kerr states. Dsrlisan85 (talk) 06:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * One more note: you cite 'no consensus' as being reason to revert- but there was no meaningful edits of the page for years. There was no one to gain consensus from. This page is a stub, not a strongly debated topic. Dsrlisan85 (talk) 06:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Current Revision
I see that there are two editors who have been chiming in here to revert and discuss so I'm explaining all my final edits here to hopefully reach consensus and form an article that is fairly presented. Please read my first talk page note to see my original intent behind changes.

Changes this edit:

Histography is the incorrect term. Histography is the study of how historians work, not history itself. The intro section itself is vague and does not help the reader. I've added events only if they are agreed upon by both sides (legionnaire ripping the scarf off, the first shot being fired, tension stemming from this). There were also two academic citations by from journals that talk about the importance of this incident, which have been deleted for no reason and reverted back to a [who?] notation on the importance. I've added these back.

I accept that there is a consensus that editors want to have separate version of events, so I've standardized the titles as Turkish and Armenian Version of events for NPOV. "According to the version found in Turkish sources"- is repetitive as the heading already states that.

I accept that the Turkish government is considered unreliable here. However, if we are presenting the 'Turkish Version of Events', we must actually cite the Turkish version of events. It makes no sense to leave out the official history presented by the Turkish government under the 'Turkish Version of Events'. Initially I put it in the aftermath section and highlighted the source so readers could extrapolate and decide for themselves (see my original talk page post) but it seems that will not be accepted, so this is the alternative. There is also slight rewording of instances of NPOV, the ones highlighted in my original post.

Details around Çakmakcı Sait including his age and remembrance of him have also been deleted, and I have added those back in. There has never been any cited reason besides the fact that remembrance of him comes from Turkish sources-- and even physical landmarks named after him have been discounted as a result. Non-government Turkish sources have been deleted purely for being Turkish. Respectfully, that's a bias that cannot be enforced. I understand that events of this battle are deeply politicized to the point of great contention, but it makes no sense for anyone other than Sait's community to mourn him.

I've kept the Armenian version of events as untouched as possible, but there were a few run on sentences there that I tried to edit for easier reading.

Also in the memory section--- 'alleged' when referring to the incident is unnecessary. We know it happened, we just don't know the exact details of what happened. Specific events should be referred to as alleged (outside of the framing of 'versions of events' as we've established, as that is a prerequisite for inclusion in those sections).

I hope you all can see I'm working in good faith, and with respect to your views on what the article should look like. Best ~ Dsrlisan85 (talk) 18:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Also I think the: This article needs additional citations for verification. pretty much sums it up for the reader. I'm not sure how much follow-up on this article I can do due to real-life work obligations but I hope you respect my edits and reasoning. ~ Dsrlisan85 (talk) 18:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I have also deleted the mention of the fate of Imam's cousin as that seems to be the most contentious aspect of the article and is not directly a part of the incident itself. With that, the article should be largely uncontroversial in establishing different versions of events and hopefully will not be disrupted. Best~ Dsrlisan85 (talk) 19:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Turkish Sources
Added as a topic as this is very important to note: only one of the sources describing the Turkish version of events is from the Turkish government. Keep that in mind while editing as there is no reason to discount them as unreliable Dsrlisan85 (talk) 19:41, 2 July 2024 (UTC)