Talk:Turkish capture of Smyrna

Liberation of Smyrna???

The Greeks were there for more than 3 thousands years...What do you mean by liberation? From whom? From its indigenous inhabitants? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.228.253.36 (talk) 23:31, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Untitled

Smyrna is the old name of İzmir. In 1920s the name was İzmir and not Smyrna. Thus the name of this article needs to be moved to Liberation of İzmir. I'll call the editor. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 19:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved Mike Cline (talk) 18:09, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

---

Liberation of Izmir → Recapture of Izmir – Liberation is one of the words we should avoid in wikipedia, especially in titles. Googlebooks also prefers to refer it as (re)capture of Izmir/Smyrna [[1]][[2]][[3]][[4]].Alexikoua (talk) 10:02, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Reject. It is concerning the liberation of a militarily occupied city/region. --E4024 (talk) 10:22, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

 Comment: According to google books, Recapture of Smyrna seems the common name of this event.

• "Liberation of Izmir" -Llc minimum 26
• "Liberation of Smyrna" -Llc minimum 11
• "Recapture of Izmir" -Llc mimimum 16
• "Recapture of Smyrna" -Llc minimum 31

But more than the half of books that uses the term Recapture of Smyrna are considerably old, and includes other events such as "the recapture of Smyrna from the Turks (1344)", "The Latin crusaders' recapture of Smyrna" etc. Stanford Jay Shaw used "recapture of Izmir", "Turkish recapture of Izmir" was used in the annual annual bulletin of Turkish Historical Society. Takabeg (talk) 13:19, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Comment: Actually neutral bibliography avoids to term it as 'liberation', we should take into account also 'capture of Izmir/Smyrna+1922' [[5]][[6]], where the hits overwhelmingly outnumber the povish term liberation by a ratio of more than 10v1.Alexikoua (talk) 15:59, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose per E4024 Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:29, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
• Support "Liberation" is a word used solely by the Turkish POV. Not neutral. Wikipedia is not a propaganda tool. 23x2 _φ 16:56, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
• Comment According to Webster: Liberation has two definitions.1.Act of liberating 2.A movement seeking equal rights.[7] Under the light of this definition, what is wrong with the present title ? Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 20:12, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
• Comment on the previous Comment No need to go to Webster's. Just write "Liberation of" in the search box of WP and you will see the many articles on the Liberation of cities, regions and countries. (Strangely enough only the "Turkish Liberation War" has not been accepted as such and yields one to "Turkish War of Independence".) I don't know why but there is something wrong about WP on many Turkey-related articles... --E4024 (talk) 20:21, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Sure go on... Almost all the 'liberation of' articles in wikipedia are redirections (Liberation of Iraq?). This will became a redirection too if the move succeeds.Alexikoua (talk) 20:24, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Let's see: Liberation of Arnhem, Liberation of Paris, Liberation of Bulgaria... --E4024 (talk) 20:32, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

No wonder they are about the Allied victory of WWII (the 3rd article uses a POV term which it clearly states 'according to Bulgarian bibliography...), indeed english bibligraphy tends to use that term, something off course that did not happen in this occassion.Alexikoua (talk) 06:04, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

How many standards does WP use ? Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 06:22, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Question to Nedim A.: This is the same user that claimed Greece invaded Izmir in 1919 because a Treaty signed (but never ratified) gave the area to Greece in 1920, right? Seems like s/he does not only have confusion on chronological order but also has different standards for different WP articles. Interesting... --E4024 (talk) 10:48, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose; the current title seems to be more widely used. Terms like "liberation" should often cause warning lights to flash, but ultimately the encyclopædia must document what sources say about the outside world, rather than euphemising subjects according to our own internal list of possibly-sensitive terms. bobrayner (talk) 00:53, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 2

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move page Chihin.chong (tea and biscuits) 09:02, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

---

Liberation of Izmir → Liberation of Smyrna – During the Greco-Turkish war, Izmir was officially called Smyrna, therefore the name should be changed from Liberation of Izmir to Liberation of Smyrna. Central Data Bank (talk) 08:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

• Support per nom. We are not in the business of historical revisionism. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:43, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Liberation of Smyrna?

...liberated according to who? Title appears to be WP:POV. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:52, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

It was an Ottoman city but offered to Greece at the end of the war. Thus the end of the 3 year occupation can be defined as liberation. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 07:43, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

This, of course, is liberation. Although the Greek far-right extremists did not accept it, they were occupiers in Izmir. The fact that the Greek population lived there did not make it Greek land. When Ukraine took back the city of Kherson, did we say "Ukraine invaded Kherson" or did we say "Ukraine liberated Kherson"? In fact, Greece's occupation of western Anatolia and Russia's occupation of Eastern Ukraine are exactly the same. Both countries claimed that those lands were their "historical lands" and occupied their neighbors using their own population as an excuse. In short, Greece = Russia, Ukraine = Türkiye. This is a long topic. If you want to learn history, I can teach you. :) 176.220.247.225 (talk) 13:22, 1 September 2023 (UTC)

Now, Vikipedi uses a racist terminology. Liberation is not about inhabitants. After the end of WWI the Greek army invaded western Anatolia. What ultranationalist Greeks think? Muslims and probably Africans and far-easterners are not humans, they cannot live freely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.209.32.73 (talk) 21:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 3

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 07:19, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

---

Liberation of Smyrna → Liberation of İzmir – The previous move was erroneous, in that it was based on the claim that "During the Greco-Turkish war, Izmir was officially called Smyrna". İzmir was officially known as İzmir at the time (example). This is unlike the Constantinople - İstanbul change; the name Konstantiniyye was indeed used by Ottomans. However, they never used they name Smyrna officially, because, for one thing, you cannot write Smyrna in Ottoman Turkish, so they used the name İzmir from the beginning. What happened in 1930 was the Turkish Postal Service Law came into effect, which forced others to use the Turkish spelling. So Smyrna was never renamed, it is more of a spelling difference, like Londinium and London. Today, the spelling difference is used to emphasize the time, Smyrna refers to the ancient city, and İzmir refers to the post-medieval city, again like Londinium and London. It is incorrect to refer to İzmir of 1922 as Smyrna.--Cfsenel (talk) 19:55, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Support You can see that the name was already moved to İzmir in the past but it was soon reverted. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 21:40, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 15 May 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Turkish capture of Smyrna  — Amakuru (talk) 21:24, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

---

Liberation of İzmir → Battle of Smyrna – Smyrna, which was assigned to Greece by a valid international treaty and had a large Greek population, was not occupied and thus could not be "liberated". It would be like calling the Siege of Breslau the Liberation of Wrocław Genealogizer (talk) 20:04, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

• Comment As there was no "battle" in Smyrna, really, I feel the title Turkish capture of Smyrna would probably be more accurate than either the current title or the proposed one. Rockypedia (talk) 20:35, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
• Support Rockypedia's alternative. Almost invariably known as Smyrna in English-language sources referring to this period of its history and "liberation" is highly POV given its status. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:50, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
• Support "Turkish capture of Smyrna" Four things. A) The nominator's rationale is absurd. Occupations can and do happen legally all the time (see: Occupation of Japan). Without this distinction that he/she makes, the claim that "liberated" is impossible lacks any support. B) We should bear in mind what seems to me the best comment on this Talk page which initially opted for "liberated" by BobRayner that "Terms like 'liberation' should often cause warning lights to flash, but ultimately the encyclopædia must document what sources say about the outside world, rather than euphemising subjects according to our own internal list of possibly-sensitive terms." I agree with this sentiment. But C) I find "Liberation" is considered a POV term in the literature (see: Neyzi, for example). So unlike other move requests where the terms are claimed to have a biased POV based on no evidence whatsoever, this is not such a case and we should seek a neutral POV. D) Battle of Smyrna already exists as a page and is not appropriate for this content. The most common phrase I could find in the literature was "Turkish recapture of Smyrna", I think the 're' is clunky and that "Turkish capture of Smyrna" is a good working title. (Note: I'd suggest "Turkish capture of İzmir" for stability sake with existing consensus, but there's never going to be a good answer on that from the literature, so go with whatever consensus is). AbstractIllusions (talk) 21:32, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
• Strong support: I am against giving POVs titles of historical articles as they do not represent the neutral point of view in regards to these events. For the same reasons stated by me at Talk:Occupation of Smyrna#Requested move 15 May 2017, you will find me wholeheartedly supporting this. Edit: Also, Rockypedia's alternative suggestion should be considered by the nominator as it is reasonable and logical. --SILENTRESIDENT 04:19, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 11 August 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure) Majority of respondents opposed to the move. Turnagra (talk) 05:53, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

---

Turkish capture of Smyrna → Liberation of Smyrna – First of all, liberation is opposite to an occupation. As the title Liberation of Paris, this article should moved to Liberation of Smyrna. The city was occupied then liberated. If the other page is calling an occupation, this should be a liberation, which is called in Turkey. Beshogur (talk) 17:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

• Strongly support: Smyrna was under occupation by a foreign power, when it was taken back it was "liberated" from a foreign army. (Central Data Bank (talk) 21:17, 11 August 2020 (UTC))
• Oppose. One nation's liberation is another nation's disaster. The current title is WP:NPOV. --T*U (talk) 14:33, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Great manipulative edit. See Great fire of Smyrna. Your argument is not valid. Beshogur (talk) 18:28, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Excuse me? Manipulative? For pointing out that the current title is neutral, while the proposed one is not. Please see WP:NPA. --T*U (talk) 21:45, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Regarding earlier Turkish captures of the city (per Srnac below), I see no need for disambiguation per year in the title, since this will most obviously be the primary topic. A hatnote may be required, though, to guide someone looking for the Seljuk capture etc. --T*U (talk) 08:04, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Per WP Commonname, the title should be called Liberation of Smyrna (or Izmir). If you check this on Google books, you will see lot of sources using this. Beshogur (talk) 12:02, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Google books: "liberation of smyrna" 1922 -wikipedia 3 hits

Google books: "liberation of izmir" 1922 -wikipedia 16 hits

Google books: "capture of smyrna" 1922 -wikipedia 10 hits

Google books: "capture of izmir" 1922 -wikipedia 15 hits

And since you ask for it (below):

Google books: "turkish occupation of Smyrna" 1922 -wikipedia 14 hits

Not really conclusive. I can add that two of the hits for liberation/Smyrna actually talks about "liberation of Smyrna from the Turkish army" and that one of the hits for liberation/Izmir talks puts "liberation" in quote marks. No obvious commonname. --T*U (talk) 13:14, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. Note, though, that this wasn't the only time the Turks captured Smyrna. They did it two or three times before in the Middle Ages. Possibly four if you count the Timurids as Turks. Srnec (talk) 22:57, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

It was first time captured by Tzachas, who was under Byzantine service and took the city to its own control. The second by Timur, which was a sacking more than a capture, third was a conquest by the Ottomans, and this was neither a capture nor a conquest. Lot of sources mentions it as "liberation of izmir", search it on Google books. "Turkish capture of Smyrna" is more like an original research move without a real consensus. Beshogur (talk) 12:00, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose current title is neutral, proposed one is not. May need disambiguation by year per Srnec. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:13, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support It was a Turkish city and this was short time a occupation. SO it was liberated like paris Shadow4dark (talk) 01:46, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose Nor recaptured by the Ottoman Army but captured by a new occupation force. This should be reflected in the title. Dimadick (talk) 10:53, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Is this your argument? Really? No one consider the capture of Izmir as an occupation, no single historical source mentions it. If you find one, please put here, I will be glad to see. Beshogur (talk) 11:56, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Google books: "turkish occupation of Smyrna" 1922 -wikipedia 14 hits --T*U (talk) 13:14, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

• Support per Beshogur. --► Sincerely: SolaVirum 12:19, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

If neutral language should be used and calling a state taking their own land from enemy "liberation" would be against neutral language, then "Fall of Constantinople" is extremely biased and should be changed to "Conquest" or "Capture" as well. (Random wiki reader)—Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.230.175.181 (talk) 00:45, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose per T*U, Smec, Peacemaker67 and Dimadick. As is evident from the previous four nominations, starting with 2012's Talk:Turkish capture of Smyrna#Requested move, "Liberation of..." has been traditionally a controversial and often misused term (recent discussions include Talk:Annexation of Dadra and Nagar Haveli#Requested move 21 November 2019 and Talk:Annexation of Tibet by the People's Republic of China#Requested move 22 January 2020). Thus, unless there is universal consensus that a territory has been liberated from an occupier that had no right to it by international treaty, history, population or any other legal justification, as in the case of Liberation of Paris or, for that matter, Liberation of Kuwait, the term should be used sparingly. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 23:55, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose, per Roman Spinner. We use the term Liberation in Liberation of Paris as a WP:COMMONNAME not as a WP:NDESC. No user has provided evidence from WP:RS to suggest that the event is seriously referred to as a "liberation" in English-language scholarship. As there is also an obvious WP:POV implication, I also suggest speedy close. —Brigade Piron (talk) 11:15, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Expulsion of Greeks from Smyrna

Shouldn't this article at least briefly mention the huge expulsion of Greeks from Smyrna by Turkey? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 07:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

This topic has already been discussed in Population exchange between Greece and Turkey. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 08:18, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Edit wars & civility

Hello @MarshallBagramyan, may I ask you what did you exactly mean by "Your problematic behavior has been noted elsewhere"? Where is it noted at? Calling an editor's high effort edit a "problematic behavior" is not really WP:CIVIL. Contributor @Utku Öziz openly expressed that he is not on the purpose of supporting any kind of ideology or agenda, implying that his purpose is supporting and developing encyclopaedia. "This is just an apologetic account based on OR to excuse the burning of the city by the Kemalists" seemed to me as WP:JDL, the edit is supported with both Greek and Turkish references while Greek ones being majority. Could you please explain how exactly Greek references were used to excuse the controversial claim of Kemalists burning the city? BerkBerk68^talk 18:49, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Well I must agree that the addition (while the source is not very well known by me) appears to be sourced while the former part was to a large amount not. I have NPOVED and wikified the addition a bit and if an editor wants to add more sourced info is welcome to do so.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:43, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and support to the contribution @Paradise Chronicle. BerkBerk68^talk 11:23, 29 July 2022 (UTC)

Discussion about Reliable sources at RS noticeboard

There is a discussion regarding if the three refs "Marjorie Housepian Dobkin, Smyrna 1922: The Destruction of a City (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1971; 2nd ed. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 1988); Giles Milton, Paradise Lost: Smyrna, 1922 (New York: Basic Books, 2008)." are reliable sources.

Basic Books, Kent State University Press, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, are obviously three mainstream respected publishers with a reputation for fact checking and accuracy, but an IP address is disputing that they are. They left the edit summary: "Sources from Armenian nationalists is not reliable. It's biased and neo-fascist."

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Editor rejecting Basic Books, Kent State University Press, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich as reliable sources  // Timothy :: talk  12:47, 1 September 2023 (UTC)