Talk:Black Sea slave trade

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Europe, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to European topics of a cross-border nature on Wikipedia.EuropeWikipedia:WikiProject EuropeTemplate:WikiProject EuropeEurope
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discrimination

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination 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.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Human rights

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Trade

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trade, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Trade 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.TradeWikipedia:WikiProject TradeTemplate:WikiProject TradeTrade
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Proposed merge of The Crimean slave trade into Black Sea slave trade

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 proposal withdrawn by nominator. Wikishovel (talk) 17:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New article is a tendentious WP:CFORK following several reverts at Black Sea slave trade. It's mostly a translation of a single blog post, https://islam.in.ua/ua/istoriya/rabstvo-v-osmanskiy-imperiyi-ta-krymskomu-hanstvi . Wikishovel (talk) 15:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New article was created by a user who have been engaged in an edit war in the Black sea slave trade article, attempting to delete referenced information of the Crimean slave trade by calling it "Russian propaganda" and replace it with appologetism. New article is biased, lack proper sources and are created by a user engaged in an edit war to introduce their own non-neutral POW by using several IP-adresses, an account used only for this, as well as what appear to be a sock puppet. New article should be deleted. --Aciram (talk) 16:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with User:Aciram: there really is nothing worth merging here, and this merge proposal is blocking more appropriate action on the WP:CFORK. Closing discussion. Wikishovel (talk) 17:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Delete the section "Crimean slave trade 15-18 centuries".

Delete the section "Crimean slave trade 15-18 centuries". The section contains bias because it is highlighted in bold. Unreliable information, because scientists who have nothing to do with the Black Sea region are cited. The works of Ukrainian, Turkish and Caucasian historians-scientists were not used. 178.133.11.22 (talk) 18:37, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please log back into your user account. Wikishovel (talk) 18:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They did not mention the influence of Islam on the attitude of slaves in the Crimean Khanate, which is very important. They did not mention that Geray and beys often entered into political marriages with the Circassian family of Beslenei, as Ukrainian historians wrote about (G. Abdullayeva). Therefore, the chapter on the Crimean Khanate should be removed. 178.133.11.22 (talk) 18:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The chapter contains prejudice, as it strongly emphasizes the cruel treatment of slaves. And the documented facts about the good treatment of slaves, which was explained by economic, political and religious reasons, are ignored. 178.133.11.22 (talk) 18:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, but please log back into your user account. Wikishovel (talk) 18:46, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I can't log into both my accounts. AzaqQara (talk) 18:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Several Ukrainian and one Russian historians (S. Gromenko, O. Hayvoronsky, G. Abdullayeva, V. Vozgrin) refuted the thesis that the slave trade was the main income of the Crimean Khanate. This thesis arose as a justification of Russian imperialism and the genocide of conquered peoples, as many Ukrainian historians also said. AzaqQara (talk) 19:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And why do you have two accounts? Wikishovel (talk) 19:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

accidentally. I didn't immediately remember the first one and the password to it AzaqQara (talk) 19:10, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A reliable source

https://ua.krymr.com/a/istoriia-krymu-ekonomika-krymske-khanstvo/29427826.html AzaqQara (talk) 19:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://islam.in.ua/ua/istoriya/rabstvo-v-osmanskiy-imperiyi-ta-krymskomu-hanstvi AzaqQara (talk) 19:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the first source coupled with the kind of disclaimer you'd find attached to an opinion piece? Draken Bowser (talk) 19:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://genderindetail.org.ua/library/istoriya-i-pamyat/zhinky-v-krimskotatarskomu-suspilstvi.html AzaqQara (talk) 19:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

http://resource.history.org.ua/item/0013435 AzaqQara (talk) 19:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://youtube.com/@user-mb6si8po3c?si=mvyG4K0eGAIlRZ7k AzaqQara (talk) 19:20, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Наш Крим: неросійські історії українського півострова, Сергій Громенко.

https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=f0SGDQAAQBAJ AzaqQara (talk) 19:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Historians S. Gromenko, O. Hayvoronsky and V. Vozgrin wrote that the Crimean Khanate was not as large and rich as neighboring empires. Therefore, having slaves was economically unprofitable for the majority of the Crimean population. 178.133.11.22 (talk) 19:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section sows enmity between the two peoples of Ukraine - Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars. You mentioned Ukrainian folklore, but you did not mention Ukrainian historians who wrote that both Crimeans attacked Ukrainians and Ukrainians attacked Crimeans.

http://resource.history.org.ua/item/0009625 178.133.11.22 (talk) 19:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainian folklore also recorded cases when Ukrainian families sold their relatives to Crimea for various reasons. AzaqQara (talk) 20:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://localhistory.org.ua/texts/statti/priiateli-priiateliv-iak-kozaki-z-tatarami-soiuzi-ukladali/ 178.133.11.22 (talk) 19:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://localhistory.org.ua/videos/bez-bromu/vladislav-gribovskii/ 178.133.11.22 (talk) 19:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/28526579.html 178.133.11.22 (talk) 19:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article is sourced by works published by reputable national and international publishing houses. Rather than posting links to various sources you need to argue why your best sources are WP:DUE when compared to the premier sources the article is based on. Draken Bowser (talk) 20:02, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Books should be bought in online bookstores.

And your actually unreliable sources give a one-sided coverage of this topic while ignoring many other facts. AzaqQara (talk) 20:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your sources are not authoritative, because they do not consider the history of the relationship between Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars (political alliances, international trade, wars, attacks despite the prohibition of their states). AzaqQara (talk) 20:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You did not mention Bohdan Khmelnytsky, who needed the help of the Crimean Khanate to fight against Poland. Khmelnytskyi promised to pay the khan with Polish and Ukrainian slaves. AzaqQara (talk) 20:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They are reliable because they are published by reputable publishers. You don't get to decide that they are not simply because you disagree with them. If you want to contribute to wikipedia you need to familiarize yourself with our rules. Draken Bowser (talk) 20:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How can they be reliable if they sow hatred and discriminate against one ethnic group (about basic income)?

Why is the subject of the slave trade of the Crimean Khanate torn from the general historical context. AzaqQara (talk) 20:28, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you need to argue the source material and display a fundamental understanding of our rules. This is a difficult topic and needs to be discussed calmly. You need to collect your thoughts and slow down your posting or I will have to request that you be blocked to calm things down. Draken Bowser (talk) 20:34, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The main income of the Crimean Khanate was the slave trade? Seriously? And these are your authoritative sources? And there is no discrimination here, in your opinion? AzaqQara (talk) 20:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't engage in this discussion if you feel it is appropriate to vandalize the article. Good night Draken Bowser (talk) 21:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote about Russian slaves, but you did not write about how Moscow seized the Astrakhan and Kazan Khanates and about the genocide of the Circassians. Does it matter. AzaqQara (talk) 20:20, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section of the article about the "Crimean Khanate" sows enmity between the two peoples of Ukraine and discriminates against one of them.

A section of the article contains Russian imperial propaganda. AzaqQara (talk) 20:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article

Delete the article. Half of the article talks about the territory of Ukraine, but there are no citations of Ukrainian sources. The authors do not distinguish Kyivan Rus from Russia, Rusyns from Russians, Kipchaks from Turkish. 178.133.240.86 (talk) 20:43, 4 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user appear to be the same user as Someone Qırımlı, who has been blocked indefinitely [1] after an investigation for sock puppetry [2] specifically for their behaviour regarding this article.--Aciram (talk) 11:18, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/change the section "Crimean slave trade 15-18 centuries"

This section is full of discrimination and hatespeech and doesn't quote ukrainian/crimean tatar sources. According to ukrainian historians, such as V. Vozgrin, slave trade was never the biggest (or even big) source of income in Crimean Khanate. In addition, Crimean Khanate didn't unite with Ottoman Empire to conquer Italian colonies on the peninsula. The Ottoman Empire used the instability inside Crimean Khanate to conquer italian cities, that by that time were already under the Khanate's rule. This, as well as other historical inaccuracies, makes the section discriminatory, one-sided and unreliable. Please delete the section or edit it with accordance to ukrainian sources. UkrainianPK (talk) 11:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This user appear to be the same user as Someone Qırımlı, who has been blocked indefinitely [3] after an investigation for sock puppetry [4] specifically for their behaviour regarding this article.--Aciram (talk) 11:20, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. It's not me 178.133.216.74 (talk) 12:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainians are outraged by the fact that the achievements of Ukrainian scientists are ignored in world science, especially since you write about Ukraine. 178.133.216.74 (talk) 12:32, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So you, UkrainianPK and Someone Qırımlı are all different individuals; all of you Ukrainians, who are outraged by the content of this article? --Aciram (talk) 17:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

change the section "Crimean slave trade 15-18 centuries"

This section contains discriminatory language and lacks inclusion of Ukrainian/Crimean Tatar perspectives. Ukrainian historians, like V. Vozgrin, argue that slave trade was not a significant source of income for the Crimean Khanate. Additionally, the union between the Crimean Khanate and the Ottoman Empire was not aimed at conquering Italian colonies on the peninsula. Rather, the Ottoman Empire exploited internal instability within the Khanate to capture Italian cities already under its rule. These historical inaccuracies render the section biased, one-sided, and unreliable. It should be revised or removed in accordance with Ukrainian sources. Frankovsky S (talk) 18:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you the same person as the UkrainianPK and Someone Qırımlı, or are you three different people?--Aciram (talk) 18:48, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are all three different people resisting the discriminating rhetorics this article contains. The article now is being spread on Twitter to expose the issue which Ukrainians and Qirimli wouldn’t want to tolerate. Frankovsky S (talk) 18:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need to familiarize yourselves with our policies if you wan't to get anywhere. Ukrainian sources do not take precedence on here, rather we need to weigh the totality of scolarship on the issue (this is referred to as Neutral point of view). The importance of the views of Ukrainian scholars (as far as Wikipedia is concerned) is directly related to their ability to get their work recognized by the global academic community. That is the hurdle here. Draken Bowser (talk) 19:12, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am of course happy to hear that the article is being spread online, but I am afraid it is not relevant if the information of the article hurts the feelings of Ukrainians or Crimeans Tatars. There is always a risk that facts can upset people's feelings. --Aciram (talk) 12:30, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The « facts » you are talking about were already disproven by historians. People in the discussions above mentioned all the mistakes this article contains. Frankovsky S (talk) 12:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, 3 different people who happen to be all blocked for sockpuppetry of the same account. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 12:36, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not acquainted with them, it’s not the point. The mistakes the author/s made, which that person provided above, are still valid. I see I cannot convince you to explore the topic deeper before publishing. It’s sad and disappointing to see how easily a discriminating disinformation can be spread, and that even a direct confrontation with pointing out all lie/myths cannot help to improve the article. Frankovsky S (talk) 12:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The explanation above by Draken Bowser has made the issue clear. Sources are weighed on Wikipedia in order to maintain a neutral point of view. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 13:06, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not contain the flaws claimed in this talk page, which was mainly about emotional reactions and concerns that Ukrainians would be upset with Crimean Tatars if they read this information. Nore does it contain "discrimination" - a claim hard to understand, since information are not discrimination. People's emotional reaction to this information does not change historical facts. They also claimed the information was "Russian Propaganda", which is hard to take seriously. An article can not be censured to suit people's feelings or fit bias opinions.--Aciram (talk) 13:19, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]