Jump to content

Talk:Grand National Assembly of Turkey

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Comment

[edit]

This page needs a lot of clean-up of the English. -- Beardo 01:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unbelievable factual errors

[edit]

"It was founded in Ankara on 23 April 1920 in the midst of the Turkish War of Independence with the aim of establishing a republic and overthrowing the Ottoman Sultan and his government in Istanbul." Whoever wrote this was either extremely careless or does not know hack about turkish modernization. It was clear in all initial statements that Meclis's aim was saving the monarch and the caliph. I am deleting this part.

One more thing. Single party period wasn't just a clash between Turks and Kurds. We have to expand that part by adding the İnkilaplar (Reforms) that were made by Mustafa Kemal and his friends. Deliogul 19:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Errors in the table

[edit]

The second table which is supposed to show the parliamentary composition as of 2004 is full of errors. It has nothing to do with 2002-2007 term. Probably it shows the present (as of 2010) situation. But again, the figures are incorrect. For one thing, in 2007 elections only three parties were qualified to enter the parliament, not seven. The members of the last four parties entered the parliament either as independents or as CHP members (DSP case). So in the elected column, the figures of the independent and CHP members must be higher and the figures of the four smaller parties must be zero. There are also some other errors . For example ÖDP has no members in the parliament. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 13:51, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The table is fine; it shows the current composition, and it doesn't matter as what they were elected, they are members of those parties. —Nightstallion 00:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK then, I only updated the current composition. The number of DSP members has been decreased and number of independents has increased, two new parties now have one seat each etc etc. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 17:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks! —Nightstallion 08:45, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Irrevelant period headings

[edit]

The subsection 1945-1980 of the Republican era is meaningless. Because the composition, the number of houses and the electoral systems of the pre 1960 and post 1960 had nothing in common. There was also a change in the system in 1946. The subsection should be replaced by 1946-1960 and 1960-1980. I'll call the editor.Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 11:50, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Turkish Parliament Building.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Turkish Parliament Building.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:11, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:TBMM interior.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:TBMM interior.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:23, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:TBMM pic.jpg Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:TBMM pic.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:18, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Composition: critics of the 10% threshold

[edit]

Considering: "This rather high threshold has been internationally criticised, but a complaint with the European Court for Human Rights was turned down. " From my point of view the criticism must be relativized. 10% is indeed a high threshold, but basically the UK system doesn't make sure that a party getting 11% of votes gets a seat at all. In character they are different, in the UK it's good for a party who is strong in a region, in turkey nut necessarily. But both systems make it hard for smaller (not small) parties. Although the UK system is criticized as well, as far as I can see it not in such relatively hard words. Proposal: add information or change the sentence so that it sounds more neutral. Eltirion (talk) 14:37, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see this criticism as "harsh". It's a fact that the threshold is criticised internationally, and probably more so than the UK (and US) FPTP system. While I personally agree that FPTP is not better, this comparison is OR unless sourced. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 17:20, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grand National Assembly of Turkey. 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:

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) 04:42, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Grand National Assembly of Turkey. 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:

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) 10:47, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Grand National Assembly of Turkey. 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:

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) 05:59, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

SP, DP, BBP

[edit]

@Social Studies Rules and Μαρκος Δ: DP does not siege with IYI, it is the same for BBP with AKP and SP with CHP. --Panam2014 (talk) 19:45, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is what I suspected. At this point I'd appreciate it if @Social Studies Rules could come up with a source showing that the smaller parties sit in the groups of the bigger ones. Otherwise, the default is that they sit separately. He must also understand that there is a difference between political coalitions in general, and electoral coalitions in particular. The latter only applies in elections, and has no function elsewhere, such as in parliament. Even if AKP and MHP say that Cumhur is still an active alliance, that simply doesn't matter, since the new Turkish alliance system only deals with electoral alliances. Just because those two parties are close, or are allies, or are actively cooperating on legislation, that doesn't mean they should be listed together. Μαρκος Δ 19:51, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If @Social Studies Rules does not provide a source that the aforementioned minor parties sit with the larger ones, I will make the change to the standard layout within 24 hours. Μαρκος Δ 00:05, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Social Studies Rules and Μαρκος Δ: again, there are no reason to count DP and SP with CHP and IYI because the members have left the party. Like for the formers MHP MP who have founded IYI in 2017. Also, there are no reason to made a link to Destici in the infobox. --Panam2014 (talk) 01:59, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


@Panam2014 and Μαρκος Δ: I tell you again, that’s not what it means, the point for example SP with CHP does not mean they sit together, it means that they were elected on the same list and adding a link like Destici is fine, BBP only has one MP, and I put a link to show who that member is. It is in other articles like for example House of Commons of the United Kingdom, the only Green MP has a link. - Social Studies Rules (talk) 22:46, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Social Studies Rules: we should not represent DP and SP with CHP and IYI when the deputies returned to their parties. A note is enough. --Panam2014 (talk) 11:29, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Composition

[edit]

I don't understand why the compositions of 2002 and 2007 are still present in the article... I'd remove all the info about former compositions since there are links to the members of the Parliament since 1999 in the article marked as such. And there is also a section that describes the current composition of the parliament rather good. If nobody opposes, I would like to remove the info about the composition of 2002 and 2007. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 20:42, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Beshogur: I suggest to do like to National Council (Slovakia) for HUDA PAR. Panam2014 (talk) 14:11, 4 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:54, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SP and AKP abbrevations

[edit]

Every time I try to change the abbrevations for Felicity and AK Party my change is reverted with the idea of a so called "commonly used" abbrevation. Which makes no sense. Firstly, SP is not commonly used, in day-to-day conversation everybody refers to Felicity Party as SAADET. SP is only used for character limit purposes which is not present on this platform. Also, even though AKP is pretty common, it is only common amongst the opposition in order not to call it AK which means white but is also used to say pure or clean depending on its context in the Turkish language. The party officially uses AK PARTİ in Turkish and AK Party in English. If this is an encyclopedia, we should not act according to wishes of third party sources but on official and sourced statements. The Outsider (talk) 14:02, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Party Acronyms

[edit]

Please write party abbreviations in English, not in Turkish:

AK Party = J&D CHP = RPP DEVA = D&P DP = Democratic İYİ Party = Good TİP = WPT EMEP = Labour SAADET = Felicity GP = Future 81.215.232.167 (talk) 20:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This can only be done if there is a consensus among all editors in Turkish Wikipedia.
Currently, the media generally does not translate the acronyms AKP, CHP, DEVA and TİP. The rest are mostly inconsistent both in the media and on Wikipedia. There is also a benefit with being inconsistent between different Wikipedia articles with translating names and acronyms if the media is inconsistent too, hence arbitrary usage of IYI and Good Party depending on the article. Since Wikipedia seeks to be an accessible encyclopedia for users unfamiliar with certain subjects, it should reflect conventions of popular media. I do not support this change. I invite others to share their opinions. Benlittlewiki (talk) 20:33, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MHP's placement in Historical composition

[edit]

Since AKP is both a right-wing nationalist party and a right-wing religious party, and MHP is less of a religious party, it should presumably be placed to the left of AKP in the historical composition section section. It is already placed to the left of AKP's predecessors: Refah and Fazilet. I would like to achieve a consensus about this Benlittlewiki (talk) 16:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Grand_National_Assembly_of_Turkey&oldid=1221559609"