Talk:Geographical regions of Turkey

Comments

Don't be confused by the supersection "Comments"

   The preceding "comments" super-heading is redundant and pretty much harmless tho confusing and distracting. (And this talk contib of mine would be redundant but for the confusion, and may not help in ameliorating the distraction.)
   It seems to have been included by a colleague who didn't yet have a comment to add, but wanted to be sure it was clear to us all that this talk page is for discussion on (i.e., commenting on and debating about) the accompanying article). I can't recall another talk page that started out that way, and no one should doubt that the purpose of a talkpage associated with a "Main" or "Article" Namespace page is to support discussion of that corresponding article, in this case presently named Geographical regions of Turkey.
--Jerzy•t 11:11, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Borders of The Regions

There is something wrong about those regions maps. Regions of Turkey are divided according to geography. Here is an official map: [1]. Borders of the provinces aren't determinative. For instance, most of the Sivas province belongs to Eastern Anatolian Region, most of the Gaziantep province belongs to Mediterranean Region and almost half of Konya and Çankırı provinces belongs to the other regions. Because, as I've said before, geography is determinative here, not borders of the provinces. They are already called "Geographical Regions of Turkey" officially at schools. Ajda 00:23, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Maps are interpretive. The definitions for the regions are taken from Statoids, which defines what provinces are in what region. The information from Statoids comes from official Turkish government sites.
Rarelibra 05:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree Ajda. Maps are really wrong. in that map, centre of province is in some region, all province put in that. in fact, some provinces are in two provinces.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.108.10.168 (talk) 23:08, 30 November 2007‎

   The preceding non-signing & non-indenting colleague explicitly addressed Ajda, not Rarelibra, so i retrofitted with the same indent-level that Rare used on Ajda's contrib.
--Jerzy•t 11:11, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

   Decent maps are representative; even those that require interpretation can be much more effective than prose or tables alone, when accompanied by suitable verbal and numeric information. I guess we have some info on what a statoid is, and thus what Statoids (a publication?) in the context of Turkey might concern, but more perspective and specificity would help greatly.
   And i've quickly found at least one relevant-sounding (tho dead) .tr site archived on the Wayback machine site.
--Jerzy•t 11:11, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

   It should be noted that Ajda was blocked about 8 months later, and their "big map2" image is at a dead link.
   Their opinion was less than lucid then,
interactive explication by them is beyond plausibility now, and
we may even know neither

what aspect of Turkey's subdivisions it was, that the map they were making reference to was representing , nor

which representation -- of the (at least at some points incompatible) available versions of borders of the same entities -- they had before them.

--Jerzy•t 11:11, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

   Since no one saw a need to ask what Ajda meant by "Borders of the provinces aren't determinative", perhaps someone who is not blocked can offer their insight into what Ajda meant by saying that. And maybe even what the "something" was, that led them to say

There is something wrong about those regions maps.

--Jerzy•t 03:01, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

(A discussion, whose relationship with the rest of the section it was placed in may be either
. . .  • a result of understandable ignorance about typical en:WP talk-page organization practices, or
. . .  • just cryptic )

As I tried to clarify in the article regions and provinces do not overlap. The first division is purely geographical while the second one is administrative. Both are official though.
Evren Güldoğan (talk) 07:48, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

   In addition to the unclarity of this colleague's intent about positioning it in this context on the discussion page, their concern is obscured by the gobstopping (since, in every instance, literally false -- i endorse wikt:overlap#Verb) assertion "[they] do not overlap": i see no way that nearly any hectare, provided it lies within Turkey and is at least as compact as a square, could avoid being in its entirety a place where a region and a province overlap each other. In fact, it appears that several (and as far as i know now, perhaps many) regions overlap throughout their entire territory with a province that wholly contains it.
--Jerzy•t 03:01, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Merger

• Support merge. Cewvero (talk) 00:41, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose Merge, the article leads you to the different regions of Turkey for an easier find.Mertozoro (talk) 22:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Perhaps someone, preferably native in Turkish and fluent in English, can explicate "for an easier find".
    --Jerzy•t 11:11, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
    
• Support--AlefZet (talk) 18:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
• Support -- Both articles are about the same issue. The other article can also lead you. Evren Güldoğan (talk) 07:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

   25 Feb; 1.5 months elapse; 13 Apr; 5 weeks elapse; 20 May; 6 weeks elapse; 9 July; 6 years elapse,
and no one has made clear what things would be merged, nor shown interest in asserting an outcome.
I'm declaring the proposal stillborn, and if i can find evidence that someone did something on the premise that their own proposal had succeeded (i think i recall 75% being called an effective consensus), i will consider declaring myself misled and think further.
--Jerzy•t 11:11, 9 & 20:02, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Article name

Why did I change the name of this article from "Regions of Turkey" to "Geographical regions of Turkey"?
1. They are called as such in Turkish sources. Not just Turkish Wikipedia, but Turkish sources in general.
2. These regions are divided (primarily) by geography.
3. These regions should not be confused by other division of Turkey, such as NUTS of Turkey. --Mttll (talk) 18:01, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Geographical regions of Turkey. 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/20120331031032/http://web.sakarya.edu.tr/~ayigit/ESERLER/TRbolgeayirm.pdf to http://web.sakarya.edu.tr/~ayigit/ESERLER/TRbolgeayirm.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) 03:37, 13 October 2017 (UTC)