Talk:Ali Kemal

Move?

The article Bey indicates that "Bey" is an honorific title. It does not imply that people with the title incorporate it as a part of their name. Wikipedia naming conventions are usually to ignore honorifics, so should this article be moved to Ali Kemal? DWaterson (talk) 01:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

There seem to be quite a few articles that have Bey in the title. The article of Cihangirzade İbrahim Bey states that he had to remove the Bey after the 1934 Law on Family Names in Turkey so it may be that it is OK to use the Bey for those who had commonly used it prior to this date. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 10:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Here's a few that I found (there are probably more): Osman Hamdi Bey, Şahin Bey, F. D. Amr Bey, Cihangirzade İbrahim Bey, Hacı Arif Bey, Tanburi Cemil Bey, Reşit Bey. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 10:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Pasha?

In a report in The Times dated May 19, 1919, it states that Ali Kemal Pasha was appointed interior minister in the cabinet of Damat Ferid Pasha, replacing Mehmed Ali Bey who retired. All further references state Ali Kemal Bey was the interior minister so I presume The Times was mistaken describing him as Pasha? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel (talk) 11:36, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

In the late Ottoman period the "title" Bey did not mean more than "Mr.", indicating that the man so designated was not a simple worker or peasant. Indeed, in the Turkish Wikipedia the article on this person is simply named Ali Kemal. To Bey or not to Bey is a question of what is the most common designation in English-language publicatons concerning the person. The title Pasha was a real title, bestowed only by ferman of the Sultan, comparable to British "Sir". It is likely but not certain that The Times was mistaken in using the title. If not, still the most-common rule should prevail.

Shouldn't the article state that his original name was Ali Rıza?  --Lambiam 08:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Story about his son, etc.

Actually the story about his son doesn't really belong into the article. There is just a little bit of irony in the story about the assassination plot in Madrid. - Citations, further quotatoins should be added in the last two paragraphs. And 'unidentified' Armenians at least specified by 'terrorists' otherwise it looks a little bit copied from a anti-Armenian, Turkish-sponsored page. Apocolocynthosis (talk) 23:12, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Dropping quotations

@85.108.10.150 - IP from Bursa. You simply dropped the Quotation from Genocide. Issues, Approaches, Resources regarding the death details of Ali Kemal. I wonder why you have an interest in obscuring sources without adding information. Not very helpful... Apocolocynthosis (talk) 23:20, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Daughter by 1st wife Winifred (nee Brun)?

The second section after the introduction, Exile in England states as follows.

Ali Kemal fled to exile in England, where in late 1909, his wife Winifred (née Brun) (an Anglo-Swiss lady whom Ali Kemal had married in London in 1903 [7]) gave birth to a son, Osman Wilfred Kemal. Shortly after giving birth his wife died of puerperal fever. Ali Kemal stayed with his son and daughter with his mother-in-law Margaret Brun (nee Johnson) in Wimbledon until 1912 when he returned to Turkey, marrying again.

I think that the article could be improved with further mention of the unamed daughter -- sister of Osman Wilfred Kemel, at least her name. Also it appears that Kemel left his children by Brun in England during the 1st World War. That should be further stressed in the article as it would clarify the 'Britishness' of Osman Wilfred Kemel (later Wilfred Johnson) and his decendents.--TGC55 (talk) 12:38, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

According to Boris Johnson's Who Do You Think You Are? programme last night, the daughter's name was Selma. It also quoted a letter from the Home Office to Margaret Brun in October 1916 saying that Osman was a British subject by birth, and it seems that they adopted the Johnson surname from that point. -- Arwel (talk) 23:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit by Hsynylmztr

This is largely unsourced, POV and WP:UNDUE. Respect WP:BRD and discuss it here since you have been reverted by multiple editots. DeCausa (talk) 11:41, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

DeCausa Thanks for opening this talk discussion. Indeed, it’s largely unsourced and the sources added are either biased, libelous or unreliable. Not to mention there isn't single WP:INDEPENDENT source, the languages they use like “fought against invading imperialism” certainly can’t be considered a reliable source(s). Overall, a giant violation of WP:NOTADVOCACY. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 12:08, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

I provided reliable sources for my edit, including Ali Kemal's own newspapers and memories of contemporary statesmen. However, you keep deleting my entire edit by just saying, 'it is not sourced.' You seem to be in an edit war. I studied Ottoman Turkish, and I can read Ottoman newspapers. Unlike me, who provided many books and Ali Kemal's reports, you do not give any source while deleting my edits. Can you explain which part of my edit is unreliable and how did you decide it as a person who doesn't even speak Turkish? Stop your vandalism and respect the academic information I prove to Wikipedia. Who are you to decide if these books are independent or not? I will explain all my sources in detail just to stop your anti-Turkish propaganda, which is very popular on Wikipedia nowadays. It is very hard to create a detailed book about the Turkish War of Independence since the sources are from many different languages and they are in separate archives. So it takes a lot of research to collect all information from Turkish, British, Greek, French, and many other sources, and it is very hard to search and find these documents. In addition to these, not everyone has the right to access the archives. I will explain my sources and revert your edits again. If you keep deleting my edits, I will report you two. Try reading my sources, learn Turkish and Ottoman Turkish and read Ali Kemal's post from the early 20th century, so then you may be compatible to discuss with me.

1st source: 'Zeki Sarıhan, Kurtuluş Savaşı Günlüğü, I-II-III, Ankara 1993-1995.' Written in 10 years by searching through Turkish Ministerial archives, the writer examined almost all main sources from both Ottoman and Republic eras. Local newspapers published in Istanbul and Anatolia during the Turkish War of Independence are used as sources. Greek sources, which are copied and saved by the Turkish Chief of the General Staff, Department of War History, are also used in creating the book. English and French sources are also used. The book covers all years from the Armistice of Mondros until the Treaty of Lausanne.

2nd source: 'Şerafettin Turan, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk; Kendine Özgü Bir Yaşam ve Kişilik, 2. Bas, Ankara, 2008.' written by Prof. Dr. Şerafettin Turan, over 40 years of work. An extremely detailed book about Ataturk's life, War of Independence and early Republic.

3rd source: 'Salahi R. Sonyel, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk ve Kurtuluş Savaşı, C. I-II-III, Ankara, 2008.'

4th source: 'Falih Rıfkı Atay, Çankaya, Pozitif Yayınları, ty.' Falih Rıfkı Atay is one of the important journalists of the period who was with Atatürk from 1923 to 1938, listened to his experiences from himself and even witnessed many of them. Çankaya is a magnificent book that tells about every detail from the birth of Atatürk to his school years, from the fronts he fought to the revolutions he made, from the discussion tables to his humanitarian aspects, by giving place to anecdotes.

5th source: 'Turgut Özakman, 1881-1938 Atatürk, Kurtuluş Savaşı ve Cumhuriyet Kronolojisi, 3. Bas, Ankara, 2009.' Again a very detailed book.

6th source: 'Cengiz Dönmez, Milli Mücadeleye Karşı Bir Cemiyet; İngiliz Muhipleri Cemiyeti, Ankara, 2008.' A book about "İngiliz Muhipleri Cemiyeti" which worked together with British Intelligence in order to establish a Brtitish mandate on Ottoman Empire. Written by Prof. Cengiz Dönmez.

7th source: 'Celâl Bayar, Ben de Yazdım; Milli Mücadeleye Gidiş, C.I-7-8, İstanbul, 1997.' Written by the third President of Turkey, Celal Bayar. He experienced all these events firsthand. A very important book to understand what was going on during the war.

8th source: 'Osman Akandere, Hasan Ali Polat, Damat Ferit Paşa Hükümetlerinin Milli Mücadele Karşıtı Politikaları, Ankara, 2011.' A crucial book to understand Ali Kemal's role during the Independence War. This book is about Damat Ferit Pasha government. He was married to the sister of Sultan Mehmed VI. Damat Ferit's treason and Ali Kemal's role explained in detail.

9th source: 'Zeki Sarıhan, Kurtuluş Savaşı’nda İkili İktidar, İstanbul, 2000.' An important source for the interactions between the Ataturk's Ankara government and Sultan Mehmed VI's Istanbul government. An important source for the War and Ali Kemal's actions of treason.

10th source: 'Turgut Özakman, Vahdettin, Mustafa Kemal ve Milli Mücadele, 6. Bas, Ankara, 2007.' Book explains the role of Sultan Mehmed VI during the Turkish War of Independence. Again, a crucial source for Ali Kemal.

11th source: 'Mustafa Uzun, “Ali Kemal”, TDV İslam Ansiklopedisi, C.2, 1989,s. 405-408' Again, information about Ali Kemal.

12th source: 'Sabah, Peyam ve Peyami Sabah Gazeteleri koleksiyonları.' This is the most important source among all the sources I mentioned above. Because this is the collection of "Ali Kemal's own newspapers!!!". His own writings, his own posts, his own words, his own newspaper. This is, of course, the most important source of my edit. I mentioned quotes from him in my edit, they were from his newspaper posts. And as it is obvious, I had to study and learn Ottoman Turkish to be able to read them.

You asked me to show my sources and prove them on the talk page and here it is. Being an open-source platform is both blessing and curse of Wikipedia because It can attract readers like me but it also can attract some random people on the internet who will delete your months of reading in a few seconds. Thank you for reading. Hsynylmztr (talk) 13:34, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

First of all, you didn't address any concerns brought up on talk, such as complete lack of WP:INDEPENDENT sources. Secondly (and this ties to the first one), Turkish sources on this period and subject are often negationist and most of these "personal newspapers" are WP:PRIMARY sources to begin with. You need reliable WP:SECONDARY sources for such claims especially, per rules. Also, please see WP:AGEMATTERS for old outdated sources/newspapers.

Lastly, considering all of this and the language those sources use like "fought against invading imperialism", that edit is just WP:UNDUE and radiates jingoistic WP:ADVOCACY. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 20:30, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Agreed. No modern secondary WP:RS backing these paragraphs up. It’s nationalistic bombast wrtten in poor English with an unencyclopedic tone. DeCausa (talk) 21:21, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Every non-biased people can clearly see that both of you are one-sided rather than being honestly neutral. I mentioned a quote from Ali Kemal and I cited his newspaper from 1921. How come this source is not reliable because it is from 1921, it is the date when he wrote these sentences to his newspaper. What should we do then, ask Ali Kemal to write the same thing today ?? And none of the books are outdated, all of them are from either the 90s or 2000s. How is it outdated? I don't know if you believe in karma but this black propaganda you do on the internet will seriously backfire one day. Hsynylmztr (talk) 13:38, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

I suggest you drop this if you can't comprehend Wikipedia rules and repeat the same things. "1921 personal newspapers" are WP:PRIMARY and WP:AGEMATTERS, you seem to have hard time understanding this. Also, you can get blocked for personal attacks such black propaganda you do on the internet, insulting multiple fellow editors. DeCausa I think this is getting repetitive, and the user refuses to acknowledge wikipedia rules by providing secondary and independent reliable sources or sources that aren't outdated personal newspapers, instead they resort to insults now. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 15:08, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

They apparently continue with rants even after the case closure and the warning given to them. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 15:13, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

If you are free to tell me my edit is nationalist bombast, unreliable, biased, libelous, then I can tell you my opinion about your edits, black propaganda. It is only as much an insult as your words, not less or more. I think you seem to have a hard time understanding what I meant. Ali Kemal wrote these words in 1921, so the source must be from 1921. It is clear that the majority determines which source is reliable and independent in Wikipedia. Hsynylmztr (talk) 21:18, 27 December 2021 (UTC)