Talk:Demographics of the Ottoman Empire

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Demographics of Turkey#Ottoman Empire period|Demographics of Turkey]] The anchor (#Ottoman Empire period) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Table

I feel the table is far too wide, the font is too small, and it is generally hard to read. Would it be possible to reformat the data somehow? Thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 22:16, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is a big joke to calculate Kurds as around 400 thousands(Toynbee and Ottoman sources). How do you calculate nomads after all? Is after 2 century long mass killings, ethnic cleansing of them resulting in 20 millions Kurdish population (from zero or from heaven or many millions of apes has gone through evolution to become Kurds in between or from what else could it have been possible?) ? :). 'By the end of World War I, up to 700,000 Kurds were forcibly deported and almost half of the displaced perished'(1915-18), this phrase is sourced in 'Kurds' article of Wikipedia and it means Turks had in their minds the cleansing of Kurds. There is no source to calculate how many Kurds had been killed during Russian-Armenian-Kazakh(most of Russian army was from these people in Eastern front) invasion of Eastern-Anatolia at all (since Russian-Armenian aim was complete cleansing of Anatolian non-christians) and Ottoman citizens had no guns to survive, even Ottoman army had no enough gun to fight and Ottoman army was too busy with other armies (Gallipoli, Palestine, Baghdad) to fight in Eastern-Anatolia. So these Ottoman and Western calculations are based on sedentary people and on their huge biases(Turkish bias and Armenian bias). There is no reliable nomadic people calculation in it and most of Kurds were lived as nomads. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.233.217.102 (talk) 19:14, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo! Why in the table for the "etnicity" there is "greeks"? This is statistics for the religios belonging of people. This are not greeks, this are people who belonged to the church of the ortodox patriarch in Istanbul. They were from very deferent etnicity. And it is correct they to be clasifited as religios group, not as etnic, as are clisifated the musulmans.

I rea;y apologise for my english :) , best regards to all.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.43.236.223 (talk) 20:10, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And one more thing. In tje artical is whrited that in the census was etnic group "macedonians". There was not such a etnicity in 19 century. In the Ottoman empire is not recorded never such etnicity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.43.236.223 (talk) 20:19, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Different maps

Why are these two maps so different?

--Oddeivind (talk) 16:28, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Census"

First of all, there was no 1914 "census". The last official population count was made in 1905. Apart from that, I think the "census" articles should be merged into this one. The "census" for 1914 is actually a collection of population statistics rehashed from the former ones, and also there are other sources apart from the official ones which are not included. --92slim (talk) 10:50, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Balkans1877popC map

The map labeled as "Major millets in the European sanjaks and vilayets in 1877." with the file name Balkans1877popC.gif has been removed from the article, as it not supported by the source it's claimed to be based on. "Ottoman population, 1830-1914: demographic and social characteristics" does not contain information about the ethnic composition of any of the sub-provinces (sancaks) of any vilayets except the Tuna vilayet, so this part is unverified original research. Also, the sources onthe ethnic composition of this period cited in this book distinguished only Muslims and Non-Muslims, so any information on Bulgarians and Greeks is original research as well. Furthermore, many of the numbers of this map are contradicted by the source. For example, the vilayet of Işkodra is claimed to have had a Muslim majority of 62.5%, when in fact according to the source Non-Muslims were in the majority (page 117). Kostja (talk) 21:32, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All the information in the map is supported by the source it's claimed to be based on. Please provide an actual reason before removing it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.43.96.96 (talk) 02:31, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your claim is false. Very little of the map is supported by the source. On page 116 and 117 of "Ottoman population, 1830-1914: demographic and social characteristics" - the only source of this map - there are three tables concerning the ethnic composition of Tuna vilayet and its sancaks and one table (I.6) about the ethnic composition of the vilayets of the Ottoman Empire. These are the only figures provided on the ethnic composition of the administrative divisions of the Ottoman Empire in this period. There is no information about any sancaks outside Tuna, no information about different non-Muslim groups and some of the information is contradicted by the source. If there is source in the book which backs up the information in the map, please give the exact page number before reinserting the map. Kostja (talk) 07:09, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is information about the ethnic composition of all villayets and sanjaks in "Ottoman population, 1830-1914: demographic and social characteristics" (Adrianople, Tuna, Salonika, Janina, Kosovo, Bosna, Istanbul). Help is to be expected if you at least read the source. If you read the source you would find the pages. You base your edit on untrue claims and require somebody to cite you the pages to prove you lying or ignorant. Too busy to do this. You don't know because you haven't read it. I expect you to read the source and then to reply.

Yes, there is information about the ethnic composition of the vilayets before 1878, but not about the sancaks. The fact that I cited you the exact page and table number where this information can be found shows clearly that I've read the source. You have yet to provide any equivalent information, so your personal attacks are completely unwarranted and further discussion with you is pointless. I expect you to provide the exact page and table number of the information supporting every fact on this map, as well as an explanation for the inconsistencies between the source and the map before reinserting it. Kostja (talk) 15:50, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I only told you to read the source. Again, have you read up the source? The ethnic composition of all the sanjaks is mentioned in the source "Ottoman population, 1830-1914: demographic and social characteristics". But again, a person who who didn't check the source can not claim what is stated in the source. Once again, please read the source. If you read the source you would see all sanjaks are covered. You admitted your claim that only Tuna Vilayet is covered was false. I can help you with the rest of your misunderstandings. I am confused which sanjaks you can't find the page number of? State their names here. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.43.96.96 (talk) 23:13, 8 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have certainly not admitted that anything I said was false. Again, what is needed is the page number for the ethnic composition for all sancaks outside Tuna. This information is simply not available inside this book, for the simple reason that it has never been collected. Kostja (talk) 06:41, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]