This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2007 Turkish general election article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Turkey Mid‑importance

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Elections and Referendums

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Comments

Naming convention

I would like to resurrect my previous idea to change the current naming convention for elections. The current convention is:

Use the format "Demonym type election, date", for example "Canadian federal election, 1867"... (WP:NAME#Elections}

I propose this is changed to allow two alternatives, as follows:

Use either this form: political division type election, date, or this form: political division election of date. For example, Canadian federal election, 1867 or Canadian federal election of 1867. Where an article has been created using one form, do not move the article to the other form.

This new option would make linking more natural and make the article names more encyclopedic.

Please comment on this proposal at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions#New elections proposal

Thanks AndrewRT(Talk) 23:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion Polls

Those polls should probably be combined into one table.--Patrick 17:50, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it looks quite messy but since there are many parties in the election, the tables are ordered starting from the leading party for each poll result. It is easy to read the results this way. If we had a single table with columns showing poll results for different dates, then reader should spend time to find out who is number one, two etc. --Charlesriver 17:58, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Election Results

It says in this article that the actual percentage of wins was much different than what our Wikipedia article says. Perhaps there should be some comparison. The article is dated at 2:40pm. And it sounds conclusive. Also, our Wikipedia article lacks a source. Acumensch 21:01, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably best to wait till end results in elections like this. But it appears there is no change. Anyone want to start http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Turkish_military_coup_2007 now? Mikebloke 21:32, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The enviroment for the army to take the control is not set yet my friends. Wait the Presidental elections instead. Deliogul 08:34, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Headings

Wikipedia uses "Sentence case for headings within articles" instead of "Title Case for Headings within Articles". Please see Wikipedia Manual of Style. Thanks. Ground Zero | t 01:53, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speculation in opening paragraph

I'm not sure that some of the highly speculative remarks about the impact of this election on Turkey's future are appropriately phrased for an encylopedic article. Despite being well referenced I think they should be phrased in terms of "many commentators believe that this election will..." rather than making outright future predictions. Pugsworth 02:24, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, the only true outcome is that back in 2002, 2/3 of the people were hating AKP but today only 1/2 of them still hate AKP. This can possibly divide the country into camps which is not good. Deliogul 08:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Military

I'm researching various articles which appeared in the weeks and days before the election regarding the Turkish military's position on the election. They (the generals)released statements expressing their commitment to Ataturk's vision of a secular Turkish society, and their willingness to enforce it (remember, they've come out of the barracks four times before to "express" these wishes). My question: Should this entry regarding the military's statements (threats?) appear under the "Controversies" heading? Or does it warrant another heading entirely?Patrekursson 03:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lets see what happens, if the Military makes any threats in the coming days, then that would be noteworthy post-election events, given that they are so linked. It seems to have been relatively quiet so far Military-Civil relationship wise but that might change any time in the coming months. Mikebloke 05:39, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly they won't intervene if AKP won't try to elect the President on their own because the main goal of the army is to keep the gainings of the republic. There is a huge pressure from the young army officers to the top of the military hierarchy but Yaşar Büyükanıt tries to suppress this ambitious group. Deliogul 08:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maps

Ankara and Izmir provinces are divided into two electoral districts (Bölge), and Istanbul into three districts. Can someone direct me to a map showing these districts? Intelligent Mr Toad 11:21, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article unclear on which side won

Party names are given for electoral figures, and mention is made of the Islamic vs secular debate. But it is unclear from the article which "side" won. The article can be edited to clarify the leanings of each party, especially the party that won.

Piquin 17:28, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Turkish general election, 2007. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070928020434/http://www.aksam.com.tr/yazar.asp?a=57254,10,11 to http://www.aksam.com.tr/yazar.asp?a=57254,10,11

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:52, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]