Talk:Russo-Turkish War (1787–1792)

POV problem

This article currently reads far too much like a Russian POV. I just finished reading Great Catherine, a detailed and largely complementary history on Catherine the Great, written by Carolly Erickson, a respected author of many biographies of European rulers. Its take on this war was that Catherine effectively provoked it as part of her desire to expand Russian borders and influence. I have no doubt the the Ottomans truly desired to retake their lost territory, and I wouldn't be surprised if many of the unflattering statements about the Turks are accurate, but both sides of this conflict need to be described, probably with a bit less inflammatory verbiage. — Jeff Q (talk) 18:25, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

horse tails

when the horse tails were planted for the campaign

What does that mean? Did the Turks stick horses' tails in the ground as some kind of ceremonial declaration of war, or did they cultivate equisetum, or what? -Townmouse 16:47, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I wondered about that phrase too. I found "and the display of horsetails at the gate of the palace is the Ottoman signal of war" here. I changed "horse tails" to "horsetails" but maybe a less flowery clause would be in order. Steve Pucci | talk 04:09, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

How many wars?

Wouldn't the Austro-Turkish War, 1787-1791 and this one be the same thing? --DanielCD 19:24, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Maybe. The reference sources I'm reading, covering the Austrian side, seem to treat the two wars as separate, and if you look at the infobox with the campaigns, it seems that Russia and Austria mostly fought Turkey separately. I've tried to clarify a bit by at least linking each war to the other. If someone wants to merge everything into one war that would be ok with me as well. --that's what the German Wikipedia, with more thorough coverage, has done. Opus33 (talk) 02:03, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Srnec (talk) 19:39, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Russo-Turkish War (1676–1681) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:41, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Merge

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was…not to merge

---

Joyous! | Talk 22:14, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I am proposing merging Austro-Turkish War (1788–1791) here because both articles are still relatively short and there was really only one war with two widely separated fronts. All RS treat this as a Russo-Turkish war that Austria joined. That is why I am proposing to merge here. We could also re-title the article to reflect Austrian participation. Some RS do that. E.g., Virginia H. Aksan, Ottoman Wars, 1700–1870: An Empire Besieged, has a section entitled "Austro-Russian–Ottoman confrontations 1787–92". Srnec (talk) 02:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:43, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Those were the two separated wars of two allied countries against the same enemy, on two widely separated fronts (as the proposer said!), with separated commanders and leaders, with different time spans and (finally) with two separated peace treaties (Sistova v. Jassy), etc. etc. Merging such articles just because of merging makes no sense. --Silverije 23:28, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Wait till you here about World War II. Fronts on opposite sides of the Earth. Germany fought from 1939 to 1945. Italy from 1940 to 1943. The USSR from 1941 to 1945. The USSR didn't fight Japan until 1945. The USA didn't send troops to the Eastern Front. Italy doing it's own thing in Greece. I wonder how many wars it really was...
Since proposing this, and entirely by coincidence, I stumbled upon a reference to the "Austro-Russo-Ottoman War" in Alexander Mikaberidze, The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History, p. 29. The Russo-Swedish war was a separate thing; Russia and Austria not. It is commonly treated as one. Srnec (talk) 01:47, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

World wars are world wars as their name says and cannot be compared with regional or local wars. So all wars like Russo-Turkish wars, Austro-Turkish wars, Russo-Swedish wars, Dano-Swedish wars etc. etc. are separate wars. --Silverije 17:54, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

What if there are supra-regional wars? Or continental wars? Or multi-front wars? I've cited two sources to justify the merge. There are more. Srnec (talk) 02:14, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

• Support The two articles are short enough and they essentially cover two fronts of the same conflict, and thus are closely enough related to support having a common article; and the fact this is how sources describe it (sources which we should ideally be following...) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:00, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

  Oppose The wars both started and ended at different times, so it really can't be considered one conflict. Pacingpal (talk) 17:23, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose - Those two wars were done by different entities/states that had nothing in common, the war was done by Austria-Hungary with the ruling Habsburg monarchy meanwhile the Russo-Turkish one was done by Imperial Russia under the Romanov dynasty hence it is illogical to merge these two articles, that would become a source of dispute in future.

TheBushSush (talk) 09:43, 29 December 2022 (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.