Talk:Temeşvar Eyalet

Article name

This province is called "Elayet Eyalet of Timişvar" in Paul Robert Magocsi's Historical Atlas of Central Europe. I have also seen Timeşvar & Temişvar used on the internet. Does anyone have a preference for what the article's name should be? Olessi 23:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Since it was Ottoman province, the name "Temesvar" should be written in Turkish. However, I do not know a Turkish name for it, so, if you know it, please say what it is. I will ask some of the Wikipedia users who speak Turkish to help us with this. Also I am not sure about first word too: should it be "Elayet" or "Eyalet" (In Serbian for example it is Vilajet (Vilayet), but I do not know what is original Turkish form). PANONIAN (talk) 23:45, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

---

I'm a native Turkish speaker and actually I've never heard of that province since it isn't in Turkey's borders now. Yet, I can help you with some general rules about Turkish. Probably both "Temeşvar" and "Timişvar" are acceptable. I say so because there are many names in Turkish which are translated from other languages and therefore have many ways to say. Probably this name is also translated from its orginal name which was given prior to Turkish domination and that's the reason their pronounciations vary. "Temeşvar" sounds better though over others if you ask my opinion. For the other issue on "elayet" and "eyalet", the correct one is "eyalet" which means something like province. I couldn't help you a lot but that's best I can do. --Quinlan Vos 08:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

---

I think that the current name "Elayet of Temeşvar" would be acceptable, since word "Elayet" is used in English. PANONIAN (talk) 15:50, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Are you sure if it is also used as "Elayet" because I've never heard of it before. In Turkish there is a word like Eyalet and that means litrealy province. I'm not sure about Temeşvar but I'm quite sure about the usage of "Eyalet". --Quinlan Vos 16:39, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Eyalet is the the correct word- Elayet is a misspelling which has been duplicated in WP. Olessi 17:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Than the first issue is settled. I can't change the name though, who can? --Quinlan Vos 23:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I moved it without a problem. I'll check for double redirects tomorrow. Olessi 07:08, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 08:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Eyalet of Temeşvar → Timişoara Province, Ottoman Empire – need for standard Ottoman subdivsion title format. See WP:RM page for similar requests. Sample: Bosnia Province, Ottoman Empire. See Subdivisions of the Ottoman Empire for details of Ottoman subdivisions and Category:Provinces of the Ottoman Empire for list of pages.

Voting

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~~~~

• Support. I think that is an appropriate change for the unity of Wikipedia but I guess the name should be "Temeşvar Province, Ottoman Empire" since it is the original name in Turkish. --Quinlan Vos 18:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
• Strongly oppose Pointless pursuit of an unnecessary uniformity. If this disambiguated, it might be worth doing; but there is no need for a long name, which will usually require piping or redirection. In this case, the creation of an anachronistic Turkish/Rumanian hybrid merely adds to the nuisance value. Septentrionalis 20:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose, the Eyalet of Temeşvar is more known name, and the name should be in Turkish. This province is now divided between Romania, Serbia, and Hungary, thus it is not only Romanian name which could be alternativelly used here, but also Hungarian and Serbian. To avoid these naming problems we should keep the Turkish name, since it was the language of the Ottoman empire to which this province belonged to. PANONIAN (talk) 04:02, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Support But if the primary opposition is to Temeşvar → Timişoara then please consider voting on a change from Eyalet of Temeşvar → Temeşvar Province, Ottoman Empire LuiKhuntek 07:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Support. —Nightstallion (?) 08:27, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Voting on Eyalet of Temeşvar → Temeşvar Province, Ottoman Empire

• Support See above. LuiKhuntek 07:31, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Support See above for me too --Quinlan Vos 09:08, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. (note weakening.) I would support Temeşvar Province, however. Septentrionalis 15:34, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. Too long name. The shorter name is better. PANONIAN (talk) 01:33, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments

Ottoman provinces went by a variety of names. Some were eyalets, some were eyalets and later vilayets, some were just vilayets, and others had special names like khedivate, sharifate, and mutasarrifate. For consistency across time and space, the English term province covers it best.

---

The word eyalet is used in English to refer to this province, like in Euratlas (as well as in the Serbian historical atlases). See euratlas for example:

• http://www.euratlas.com/big/big1600.htm

Also, if we change English name from "eyalet" to "province", then current alternative names in Serbian, Romanian and Hungarian language listed in the article would be a problem. The Wikipedia reader could from that to come to the wrong conclusion that Serbian word for the "province" is also "eyalet" like in Turkish, while Serbian word for "province" is "pokrajina". And I did not saw name "Temišvarska pokrajina" in the Serbian historical atlases. PANONIAN (talk) 01:50, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

---

It could have been a "beylerbeylik" (the early name for eyalet) before it was an "eyalet." Province is English could be used for both. Don't fret too much over Hungarian or Serbian or Romanian. This is not Serbian Wikipedia or Hungarian Wikipedia...

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

---

Changing my vote

This vote was badly performed. If I know that first version of the name would be addopted I would support the second option. I change my last vote into support for Temeşvar Province, Ottoman Empire. PANONIAN (talk) 01:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

---

And if you ask me to elaborate why the current name is bad, it is because during the Ottoman rule more Serbs than Romanians lived in the region, thus the Romanian name for the article is not the best solution. It should be changed into the official Turkish name as an NPOV variant. I request new vote and changing of the name into the Temeşvar Province, Ottoman Empire. PANONIAN (talk) 01:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Just one more note: it is not disputed that name Timişoara is the best solution when we write about this city, since this city is today in Romania. However, this article is not about that city but about one province whose territory is now divided between 3 countries: Romania, Serbia and Hungary, thus the best solution here is Turkish name. PANONIAN (talk) 01:21, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

---

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 07:42, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Voting for changing name into Temeşvar Province, Ottoman Empire

1. Support PANONIAN (talk) 01:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
2. Support for the reasons explained above and by PANONIAN too. --Quinlan Vos 01:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
3. Support LuiKhuntek 06:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
4. Support. Sounds good, yeah. —Nightstallion (?) 06:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

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

Temeşvar Eyalet

Should be Temeşvar Eyalet GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 00:11, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

From the edit summary: "there was an talk page consensus about this name. It was Ottoman province and therefore name is in Turkish."

So I assume that we agree, at least, that 'province' should be replaced by 'eyalet', since vilayets, eyalets, sanjaks, etc, could be all translated as 'province' in English. As for whether the name should be in Turkish or not, I think it should not, since we have other articles where using the Turkish name would be impractical, such as Algiers Eyalet (in Turkish it should be named "Eyalet-i Cezayir").--LK 13:49, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I agree. I prefer names of the places as used in English today. But most important now to get this to be called eyalet. Usage of Turkish place names can be sorted out later. GRprefectures-have-been-dissolved (talk) 15:54, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

I would not object to change from "province" to "eyalet", but English language usually use official historical names for historical territories, so Turkish name Temeşvar is a proper name that should be used in this title. PANONIAN 21:04, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

OK then, let's move it to the page title proposed by GRprefectures!--LK 22:54, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Recent edits

There must be some mistake with info that sanjaks of Segedin, Syrmia and Smederevo were part of the Eyalet of Temesvar. Firstly, Sanjak of Segedin was located in the region of Bačka and this entire region was ceded to Habsburg Monarchy in 1699, so Sanjak of Segedin could not be part of the Eyalet of Temesvar 1700-1701. Also, according to my sources, Sanjak of Syrmia was abolished after 1699 (since much of that sanjak was also ceded to Habsburg Monarchy) and its remaining territory was included into the Sanjak of Smederevo. It is not impossible that Sanjak of Smederevo was part of the Eyalet of Temesvar, but I did not saw any other source that claiming this. Takabeg, can you please check your sources again? Is it possible that Ottoman Empire only nominally claimed that these sanjaks that were ceded to Habsburg Monarchy are still Ottoman territory? PANONIAN 09:16, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I just transfered information from sources. We must ask Orhan Kılıç :) And we can search and confirm with using other sources on same issue. Takabeg (talk) 11:38, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, if it is not big problem to you, can you write here exact quotations from your source (in Turkish), i.e. these sentences that are speaking about these 3 sanjaks? I am able to understand Turkish due to google translate web site, so it would be helpful that I can compare this with my sources. PANONIAN 15:58, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

One more thing: entire territory of the Sanjak of Segedin (or entire Bačka region) was transfered to Habsburg Monarchy in 1699, so does your source mention where exactly Sanjak of Segedin was located in 1700-1701? Perhaps some new sanjak with this name was formed in Banat after 1699? PANONIAN 16:04, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

"Bu defterde Tımışvar Eyaleti'ne bağlı sancaklar içerisinde sadece Tımışvar, Sirem ve Semendire kayıtlıdır. Bu durumun 14 Mayıs 1713 tarihine kadar muhafaza edildiği anlaşılmaktadır." (here) Takabeg (talk) 16:09, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

I might understand now what exactly is the problem here. According to one of the sources that I have, Sanjak of Segedin (which was mainly located in Bačka) also included small north-western part of Banat which remained under Ottoman administration after 1699. Therefore, Sanjak of Segedin which is mentioned in 1700-1701 is probably only this small part of original Sanjak of Segedin. So, list of the sanjaks, thus, seems accurate, but I might later include some additional data from my sources. PANONIAN 18:16, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Name

• "Temeşvar Eyalet" -Llc ?
• "Eyalet of Temeşvar" -Llc 12 -
• Ottoman + "Province of Temeşvar" -Llc 18 -

-- Takabeg (talk) 16:19, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Please do not say that you want to revert title back to "Province of Temeşvar". I am fine with both words but people all the time changing title from "province" to "eyalet" and otherwise and that is not very nice. We should find some stable version of the name and we should not rename this article all the time. PANONIAN 18:22, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Map

Underlying lk, please stop including fictional and inaccurate map to this article. There was no such thing as "Ottoman Hungary" in Ottoman administrative system and Wikipedia is no place for such POV. PANONIAN 16:50, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Temeşvar Eyalet. 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/20040308073040/http://www.sulinet.hu/eletmod/hogyantovabb/tovabbtanulas/elokeszito/tortenelem/6het/map.jpg to http://www.sulinet.hu/eletmod/hogyantovabb/tovabbtanulas/elokeszito/tortenelem/6het/map.jpg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111127213612/http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/hu/0/05/Torokvilag.jpg to http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/hu/0/05/Torokvilag.jpg

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) 15:57, 3 December 2017 (UTC)