Talk:Ilısu Dam

Introductory remarks required

I think the article should have more introductory remarks. For example, to the non-knowing person the picture of the city Hasankeyf is not motivated. I assume this city will be destroyed for the dam. However, that is not stated anywhere which significantly reduces the quality of the article. Same with the mentioning of the KHRP. No explanation of the abbreviation is given; an additional link might be useful... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.95.193.48 (talk) 13:10, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Neutrality

The entire opinion of this article is a bit skewed.

A section that suggests the dam "is motivated primarily by a desire to destroy kurds", cannot be claimed to be neutral. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 12:46, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Certainly the Kurdish Human Rights Project is not a "neutral" organization, but I fail to see what is POV about the section you've tagged. Please explain what is wrong with the description of the KHRP's view or remove the tag. — Davenbelle 03:04, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

You haven't quoted them. You use the words : "Investigations by the KHRP -found- that:", implying that the above given sentence is correct. That is certainly your own POV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.97.4.160 (talk • contribs) [diff]

I have removed that NPOV-section tag as you seem to have no argument as to what is not neutral about the presentation of the KHRP quote. I have also re-added the (quite reasonable) map caption. Please do not revert without offering a valid justification. — Davenbelle 03:22, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Stalking is against wikipedia policies, you are also prohibited from doing so as per arbcom ruling, I am not going to be polite since you seem to have difficulties understanding arbitrators. GO AWAY!

I have nothing to discuss with you for a year --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 04:11, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, do you actaully have any sources for the "evacuated at gunpoint" and the "burning down of houses"?

I have edited the article because the article states that "it has been reported", but in fact, there is no evidence of such reports, and this is only what the KHRP claims happened, not what has been reported. Since the KHRP has a pro-Kurdish POV and has been reported to be biased against Turks and Turkish Authority, their claims could be propaganda, therefore it should be stated on wikipedia that it is what they claim not what is fact. Executex 03:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality of article

This article should be reviewed again. Stating only one organization's point of view give wrong impression about the Turkey and Turkish policy. I'm disagree with the statement of "Ilısu in particular, is motivated primarily by a desire to destroy the Kurds as an ethnic group by destroying their most important cultural sites". Editor of this page should be aware that statement of destroying an Ethnic Group is only a claim. Other claims and facts about the Dam! should also be in this article.

It's definitly a propaganda section and should be dealt with. I, for once, am in no mood to argue with some pro-PKK "contributors" about why it's out of context and anyway, I'm definitly sure they'll all flock back and revert the change, so it would be very kind if someone would deal with it ASAP. --Diren Yardimli (talk) 15:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Since well after the first comment of this talk section was created, the article has been cleaned up a lot. I see POV in dam articles regularly and try to clean it up. I helped clean up this article over the last few years but the controversy regarding it is due. Regarding the anti-Kurd purpose quote about the dam, it is a quote from a notable report, not the opinion of the editor. Regarding the status of Kurds within Turkey and the publisher, I don't think it is a fringe opinion. I am not saying I believe it but I am not for it's removal from the article. Right now, the controversy section covers, in brief, both sides of the argument.--NortyNort (Holla) 02:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

work in progress ?

Has so. informations how many % of the Dam are ready / if some institution has announced an opening date ? Then pls. bring ti into the article. thanks in advance, --Neun-x (talk) 12:13, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ilısu Dam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150926095504/http://www2.dsi.gov.tr/ilisu/ilisu_ced_eng.pdf to http://www2.dsi.gov.tr/ilisu/ilisu_ced_eng.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150926095504/http://www2.dsi.gov.tr/ilisu/ilisu_ced_eng.pdf to http://www2.dsi.gov.tr/ilisu/ilisu_ced_eng.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150926095504/http://www2.dsi.gov.tr/ilisu/ilisu_ced_eng.pdf to http://www2.dsi.gov.tr/ilisu/ilisu_ced_eng.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:09, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Odd crashing while loading

Does anybody know what's happening to the article? Or whether there are any security issues with it? Trying to open the article from PC web browsers will only show Wikipedia's logo, search bar, and log-in links, all on pitch black background. And trying to open the article from a mobile browser will only show an Israeli flag. 2800:E2:1080:EC6:A931:CB27:BDFC:D438 (talk) 10:14, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

It's vandalism and it's been reverted. Nardog (talk) 18:57, 15 September 2023 (UTC)