Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of the Ottoman Empire during World War I


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. While the presence of other articles of similar nature don't automatically qualify this article for a keep (see WP:OTHERSTUFF), it seems that a WWI history page for at least the Ottoman Empire is appropriate. (non-admin closure) JudgeRM   (talk to me)  01:08, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

History of the Ottoman Empire during World War I

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article was specifically created in March 2015 by a Turkish nationalist editor (SelimAnkara1993) with the purpose of denying the Armenian Genocide. The proof for this was that he created another article, which was eventually voted to be deleted for being a POV propaganda piece: Articles for deletion/1915 insurgency in the Ottoman Empire. The user SelimAnkara1993 started editing in January 2015 and stopped in June 2015. Compare with the main article used in Template:History of the Ottoman Empire for the WWI period: Middle Eastern theatre of World War I, which was eventually restored to the template after the Turkish nationalist user was done editing and creating political articles. 92slim (talk) 04:56, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Immense historical value, comparable articles on Wikipedia (such as Military history of Italy during World War I), and tons of links to this article within Wikipedia itself and multiple versions in multiple languages. Especially more relevant considering the Ottoman Empire dissolved a short while after World War I. There is definitely a disturbing overtone to the article and it is in bad need of a neutrality clean up, which I can see after a cursory glance: disturbing lack of mention of the Armenian genocide, slightly nationalistic overtone ("at silent predawn attacks in which officers with drawn swords vent ahead of troops and only the troops to shout their battlecry of "Allahu Akbar!" when they reached the enemy’s trenches.") However, I think the solution is a major clean up, not a deletion of the entire page. There is some good info here not to be dismissed. --FuzzyGopher (talk) 06:06, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Is there any useful reliably sourced content here that is not covered in Middle Eastern theatre of World War I and Defeat and dissolution of the Ottoman Empire? If we are looking at this as part of our coverage of World War I then the former article would seem to be the best place for at, and particular coverage of the history of the Ottoman Empire woiuld seem to belong in the latter. From the point of view of Ottoman history it seems very strange to have one article covering both 1908-1914 and 1918-1922 but a separate article for 1914-1918. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 09:39, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, the former article has a lot on the Ottomans, but not as in-depth as this, I believe. There are article links leading to Balkans Campaign (World War I) and Romania during World War I under the Ottoman section, but none leading to the Ottomans specifically. I think the proposed article has a lot of info that, if incorporated into Middle Eastern theatre of World War I, would make that article far too lengthy. I don't think it is strange at all to have an article covering the 1914–1918 period; plenty of countries have separate articles in their history timeliness specifically dedicated to the two Great wars. There is the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom (a starred article, by the way), and plenty more.
 * I'm not saying the current page isn't biased and doesn't need a lot of work, but I don't think the solution is to scrap it entirely. Even if this particular article is so unsalvageable and chock-full of biased sourced that the vote goes to delete it, I still do think a History of the Ottoman Empire during World War I should exist and would be a great addition to Wiki. --FuzzyGopher (talk) 10:17, 11 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep We have similar articles on almost all participants of WI and WWII. Those articles usually concentrate on the countries instead of a theater and also contain more than just bland military action. This way they are usually very valuable. An article being biased or badly written is not a reason for deletion, it is a reason to rewrite it, maybe even from scratch, depending on how bad it is. The Ottoman Empire was a major player in WWI and lots of events happened during WWI, so it definitely warrants its own XYZ in WWx article. Generally this article should therefore be kept. Now regarding the bias: Yes the article has obviously been written by some nationalistic Turkish individual, but that can be fixed. The Armenian genocide and related events were completely missing from the article. This is a major point which needs to be in the article. Therefore I added it using material from the main articles. So at least it is now mentioned, but this section should ofc be more expanded. Dead Mary (talk) 14:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment As said by the above two editors, there seem to be many such articles. That is not an automatic argument for keep. I think some of them are of very dubious notability, such as History of Vietnam during World War I, and there seem to be a very wide range of article titles (for example United States home front during World War I) - it would be better to standardize these titles in some way. But I think for this article the assumption would be to keep it. 92slim needs to present more than content issue arguments. If there is still a problem with pov forks, then they can be dealt with on an article by article basis (I took part in Articles for deletion/1915 insurgency in the Ottoman Empire so I know 92slim is correct in his assertion regarding that problem in the past). Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:26, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I see on the article's talk page that I had expressed concerns for the article back in May 2015. My question about whether its subject was perhaps covered already in an existing article is worth answering in relation to this AfD. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:59, 12 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment While I wasn't saying the existence of other articles justifies keeping the Ottoman one, I think the Ottoman one is important in the context of WWI (for reasons given above). The History of Vietnam during World War I (which I also think is a keep, as an aside, if that issue of deletion is ever raised--or at least a salvage) seems to be based on two or three sources. The Ottoman article is extensively sourced...although I have not personally checked the validity of such sources. Again, I think it's also particular important, as this was the last truly great war the Ottomans were in. Not every country deserves a "During WWI" article, but if ever one did, it's the Ottoman Empire. --FuzzyGopher (talk) 05:14, 13 November 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.