This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Partition of the Ottoman Empire 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

Palestine Mid‑importance

	Palestine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palestine, a team effort dedicated to building and maintaining comprehensive, informative and balanced articles related to the geographic Palestine region, the Palestinian people and the State of Palestine on Wikipedia. Join us by visiting the project page, where you can add your name to the list of members where you can contribute to the discussions.PalestineWikipedia:WikiProject PalestineTemplate:WikiProject PalestinePalestine-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Former countries: Ottoman Empire

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Ottoman Empire (assessed as Mid-importance).

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.

Syria Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Syria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Syria 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.SyriaWikipedia:WikiProject SyriaTemplate:WikiProject SyriaSyria articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Russia: History / Military Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
	This article is supported by the Russian, Soviet, and CIS military history task force.

Military history: Ottoman Start‑class

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Ottoman military history task force

European history High‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

'The Balfour Declaration established the international Zionist movement to support the creation of a Jewish homeland in the Palestine region, which was the site of the ancient Kingdom of Israel'

This is factually incorrect on both counts. The 'Zionist' or Liberation Movement of the Jewish Nation had been established by the Jews themselves years before the Balfour Declaration was written and after equivalent assurances to the Zionists of their status had been previously made by the Turkish Sultan before the Great War.

This was not done on the basis of this Land of Israel* being the ancient Kingdom of Israel but of Judea and it's being *Eretz Israel. The 'Kingdom of the Jews' more to the point was Judea.

The Arabs still occupy most of the two ancient Kingdoms of the Jews apart from Yerushalayim the Judean/Jewish Capital and centre of the Jewish religion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.2.2 (talk) 12:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

USA Role?

In the opening paragrapaph, as getting "indirect or direct control" over the former ottomans empire land, but for the rest of the article, it only mentions Britain and France.

Either its inaccurate to say the USA gained control over the former ottoman empire (through post WW1 partitions) or the article needs to be expanded, to say why.

Since the partition of the ottoman empire basically (Afaik, correct me if i'm wrong) laid out the blueprint for the modern middle eastern states, being accurate, and/or a more indepth article would be pretty important

(Madrone 20:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I believe current form of the article has already include the King-Crane Commission. Obviously there is more to it and hopefully it will be extended. Thanks. --OttomanReference 22:10, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link, just read it, but it seems to basically just say that the US comission found that most favored indepdence, but if not indepedence, then american Colonial control was best, but nothing came of it, because shifts in American Congress which turned it towards beign isolationist.

The Article says "The partitioning caused the Islamic world to be directly or indirectly ruled by the leading western powers (Britain, France and the USA)." This makes it seem like the US had a big role, but from the article itself, it seems that Britain/France did the vast majority of the ruling, with American 'control' being little more than the political clout they had with Britain/France, and as a whole the US did little if any, b/c of isolaltionist policies. (Madrone 03:03, 2 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

What U are talking is an academic study, and generally do not have Yes/No answer. US also parted in Occupation of Istanbul. The final answer of your question should be searched behind the clouds of WWI. It may be the best approach to explain US in every section instead of a designated one. This does not change its importance. If WWI is not the stepping stone for US, then when was it? The vice president sometimes have more power than the presidents, :-). OttomanReference 04:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this article meant as a joke?

What is WIkipedia comming to? This is a political POV article that is extremely flimsy in its substance and support. I would also view this a a fork of the Ottoman Empiore articel (collapse of the ottoman Empire) and do not feel that this subject can be adequatly presented without an in depth discussion of the factors for disolution of such Empire and including the fact that in the process of its demise (beginning arguably in the 17th century) the Empire was unable to properly function and that corruption and abuse by the ottoman ruling/landholdign elite led to the ultimate painful collapse of Empire and in the process led to the Muslim genocides of substansial segments of the remaining Christian populations in the Empire. These are more historical relevant issues and the issue of the eventual partition of the Empire (and BTW the Turks themselves need to be discussed - as they actually cleansed territories of thier inhabitants prior to claiming the parcels of land for themselves). If one wants to discuss powers with exclusivistic intentions and who acted on such the Turks genocide and cleansing of the Christain inhabitants of the portion of the Ottoman Empire that eventual was seized by the turks and became Turkey must also be discussed. An any event these one liners referencing various agreements (without proper surounding explanation and out of context) is really not the basis for a valid WIki article IMO. What Turkish University did you say you were from BTW?--THOTH 23:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The many noteworthy contributing factors to the central subject -Partitioning of the Ottoman Empire- are worthwhile subjects unto themselves -but beyond the scope of this article. To address them -or other issues of substance depending from, but not directly factoring in the Partitioning- here would onerously encumber the function of this document. Your concern for the suffering is laudable, but not served by derisive or inflammatory language.Mavigogun (talk) 08:18, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Map request

An overall map showing the territorial changes is definitely needed. -- Beland (talk) 19:57, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Constantinople

Was the return of Constantinople and European Turkey to Greece ever considered? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.236.64 (talk) 10:30, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Title

Shouldn't the title be Partition of the Ottoman Empire? See Partition of India or Partition of Jin... —Brigade Piron (talk) 18:42, 9 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Map removal

I have deleted from the article [1] a map that was described as "Armenian proposal of a United Armenia to the Paris Peace Conference". This map is a privately-produced map without official status. There is no source for any text saying or implying it represents an actual real officially presented territorial claim. It was produced by the periodical "The New Armenia" and published in 1917, long before the Peace Conference and also before the establishment of the Armenian Republic. See https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015010945296;view=1up;seq=70 and https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015010945296;view=1up;seq=280 89.242.179.163 (talk) 17:41, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]