User talk:Sc.helm/Archive 2008

I removed the welcome message (no longer needed).--Sc.helm (talk) 15:40, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Ragıp Zarakolu
I've restored your version of the article, and merged some of the stuff from the other version. Please let me know what you think. Khoikhoi 19:00, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * We can drop it if you want, but it just seemed important to me to mention that he was in prison for awhile. What specific objections do you have to it? I also corrected Ayşenur's name. BTW, if we were to create an article about his wife, should we call it Ayşenur Zarakolu, Ayşe Zarakolu, or Ayşe Nur Zarakolu? Khoikhoi 05:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all your efforts. I still believe that my entry on imprisonment was more precise and accurate. There is no source for the assumption that Ragıp (and his wife Ayşenur, which should be her correct name) were unable to publish certain books after 12 March 1971 (they founded the publishing house in 1977) and turned to issues related to South America. Again, my description of their publishing efforts on an academic and theoretical level until 12 September 1980 is backed up by the article of Celal Başlangıç, a journalist whose articles are usually well researched.


 * Ok, no problem. I think most of the text in the original version of the article is from here. Also, it's best to cite sources by using footnotes. You'll notice that Turkey (a featured article), has 99 foonotes at the bottom of the page—using the cite web and cite book templates. You can use a citation method listed at How to cite sources. Khoikhoi 09:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * PS: Sorry for intruding here (hi Khoikhoi!), but I hate these Citation templates ! Add: see here, history of Mariscal Estigarribia for a very good reason not to use them: link rot happens, and people then remove references, as if because it disappeared from internet it was erased from history. This is worst than 1984 ! Why do people keep using them? They clutter edit space in an incredible way - if you got one, it's all right, but have a look at black sites and such articles where you need sources each sentence if you don't want to have it deleted: it makes it impossible to read the text when you edit! Why don't people just stick to common footnotes, using common links, and "manually" typewriting source & dates? End result is the same! I think it's going to be my next war cry on Wiki :) !!! Tazmaniacs

Another point is the formulation of "government-brought actions". That is nonsense. It is always a prosecutor (military of civilian) that prepares the indictment and not the government ordering a trial. The figure of "more than 30 cases" was precisely given by Ragıp himself, when he spoke during a trial against his wife (see my chapter on trials and awards). I've done an edit because (to my mind) we don't need vague formulations to highlight the fact that Ragıp and Ayşenur Zarakolu have been targetted for their opinions.


 * Again, feel free to make any changes that you think are necessary. If I object to them, I'll let you know. So far your edits have been fine, you just need to use foonotes. Khoikhoi 09:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I've made some slight changes to Turkish military coup, 1980, mostly some new names (for you, Khoikhoi & others to fill!), and some economic stuff, with the additional mention of the Carter doctrine. The source used might be a bit outdated, although of quality (I don't know the author though, just the publication), so feel free to comment or/and critique it! Anyhow, teshkur for your job on the article, it's greatly improved in a few, quick strokes! Tazmaniacs

Invitation
VikiProje Türkiye'ye davet / Invitation to join WikiProject Turkey


 * Thanks, but I feel that I have still to think about how much I want to get involved. For the moment I'm trying to improve the page on the Legal System in the Republic of Turkey.


 * No worries, there is no obligation for any level of involment or anything. It just helps as a base for Turkey-related articles, most editors only edit once or twice a week in any case :) As you wish and happy editing! Baristarim 09:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for the invitation and the offer to answer questions. I hope it is ok to express some of my worries here and not on your page or the talk page of the group.


 * There is too much to do. Pages have been started or suggested under weird names and even if I would know more about the techniques I find it difficult to get a clear structure with redirects. As an example see Category:Turkish court system.
 * Many pages are so poor that they deserve a complete rewording. As an example see Turkish Language Act Ban. The author omits that the ban only existed between 1983 and 1991. The title is misleading. If the ban on the Kurdish language is intended to be the subject the official term of ban of languages other than Turkish should be used and the whole affair should cover education and broadcasting in the mother tongue and the ban of Kurdish in various laws such as the Law on Political Parties.
 * The quality of edits varies decisively. My edit of 1980 Turkish coup d'état certainly had its weaknesses, partly due to being a newbie. After several more edits (you were involved, too) I can only see slight improvements as to the wording but overall find the article worse. Besides repetitions someone put an article of Le Monde diploatique of January 1981 at every odd place. I haven't checked the article but do not find that information helpful (if not misleading). Since it is not polite to just delete these passages what should one do in such a situation? So much for now...


 * If you still have time, what about having a look at my unfinished edit of Legal System in the Republic of Turkey and tell me what you would have done differently? Sc.helm 18:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

İHD
that tag was for the word 'so called', if you want, you can remove it. It might be good to add information about Adalet Agaoglu's quitting. DenizTC 18:39, 16 May 2007 (UTC)