Talk:Defence of Iwardo

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Vandilism

[edit]

@NinosDg I suggest you take a look at WP:NPOV, none of the sources state Assyrian, they mention Syriacs. You've also got a history for editing lots of Assyrian related topics wrongly, please take all into consideration before contradicting sources.

I will be reverting it one more time before requesting for comment. User623921 (talk) 14:12, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism & Syriac term.

[edit]

You must be greatly mistaken. The ethnicity of those who participated are Assyrians, the page has already been reverted in the past for the same type of vandalism. The term Syriac is a linguistic or church related term, not an ethnic one.

The ethnic origin of these “Syriacs” is Assyrian, modern Syriacs/Arameans are Assyrian. The source saying “Syriac” doesn’t matter, as they are in fact ethnic Assyrians regardless. Anyways I’ll provide sources right away so that you’ll stop vandalizing the page. If you continue to do so; I will simply contact an admin to determine this. NinosDg (talk) 17:15, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@User623921 NinosDg (talk) 17:17, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have read the new source you included, and it seems to be the same one from Defense of Azakh. Are you sure this is not cherry-picking? Nearly all sources overwhelmingly use the term "Syriac." For example, the other source you referenced mentions "the massacres against Syriacs in Tur Abdin" and "Syriacs with roots in Turkey" while referring to Assyrians separately. User623921 (talk) 17:56, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It does not matter what you think; follow Wikipedia’s guidelines. If the referenced sources do not state "Assyrian," you have no right to vandalize the page by applying an unsourced term. You yourself use "Syriac" in combination with "Aramean," writing "Syriac/Aramean." User623921 (talk) 17:22, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Double articles when Googling

[edit]

@Asilvering you are the only admin I know, but is there some issues regarding this article? there are two articles for this one when googling, one for Defense and the other Defence of Iwardo, both redirecting to this one Wlaak (talk) 00:35, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hhhhuh. Can't say I've ever seen that before. My guess is that google indexed the page when it was at the original title, then indexed it again after it was moved to the new title, and for whatever reason, their webcrawler didn't pick up on the fact that one of those locations has since been redirected. I don't think there's anything we can do about the google result on our end. At any rate, the redirect functions correctly, so it's not like we've got two identical clone articles, so there's no in-Wikipedia problem to solve here. -- asilvering (talk) 02:30, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Defence of Iwardo/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Surayeproject3 (talk · contribs) 16:21, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: TheBritinator (talk · contribs) 16:24, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I will review this. Please give me time to go through the article and leave comments as I go. I will most likley start this tomorrow. TheBritinator (talk) 16:24, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just off the bat, I've done a few things to prepare the sources for the article to pass GA, and this is what I still need to do:
  • Added and spotchecked Akdemir 2023, Atto 2011, Dolbee 2023, Gaunt 2020, and Lingius 2015
  • I have yet to spotcheck Gaunt 2006 (mislabeled as 2017 with Jan Bet Sawoce), Gaunt 2017, and Travis 2017. I added and did some spotchecking of Talay/Barthoma 2018
  • I'd like to check and archive all the links in References
  • Ideally, if I can find additional sourcing it would greatly expand the article; I've moved around a lot of information from one section to another, and I want to make sure that all sentences are cited
Surayeproject3 (talk) 16:30, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
May I ask, why do you not do this before nominating the article? I would expect it to be in a relatively complete shape. TheBritinator (talk) 16:48, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By the time you start reviewing the article tomorrow I will have these things done. I am still somewhat new to GAs and GANs so I like to work on things slowly, but there's not that much left for this article based on my observations. Surayeproject3 (talk) 16:51, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Spotchecked Gaunt 2017, Travis 2017, and the rest of Talay/Barthoma 2018. Still need to check Gaunt 2006, and I'd also like to check this source as well [1] (which should be ok per Wikipedia:THESIS since it has 40+ citations elsewhere) and put this [2] in the bibliography. Archived all URLs. This source would also be good for me to check as well [3]. On top of that, there seems to be an error that I don't know how to immediately resolve. Surayeproject3 (talk) 00:35, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All sources have been spotchecked. Error mentioned earlier has been resolved. The article is now ready for GA review! Surayeproject3 (talk) 05:13, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheBritinator I can't reply under the new Lead/Infobox section so I'm responding here. I tried changing the article to Defense but it was reverted [4]. If it can be changed than I would prefer it to be Defense with an s, but it's not a huge dealbreaker. Surayeproject3 (talk) 15:19, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I have moved it. If its challenged again then it can be moved to a move discussion. TheBritinator (talk) 17:38, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just got a talk page message saying that the GAN has failed, which I'm assuming is because of the page rename. I take it you're still reviewing page content at this time? Surayeproject3 (talk) 17:50, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well it has been moved again so its a moot point now unless you want to take it to a move discussion. But yes, I am still reviewing it. TheBritinator (talk) 18:56, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Surayeproject3 Apologies for the long wait but I have finished now. TheBritinator (talk) 21:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheBritinator I just finished all the recommended updates for "Aftermath". Surayeproject3 (talk) 22:10, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lead/infobox

[edit]
  • I know you didn't make either article, but the previous review I did for you had the title Defense of Azakh, whereas this one has is Defence (it is really obvious when they are placed next to eachother in the article). Since these articles are somewhat closely connected, some consistency would be ideal, but I don't see if being a deal-breaker either.
  • I have wikilinked Iwardo and Tur Abdin in the lead for you.
  • Page 55 of Gaunt, Atto & Barthoma 2017 doesn't seem to mention Azakh anywhere. I was mistaken, sorry.
  • it is often cited as one of the key reasons why the region of Tur Abdin is still surviving today you should specify this a bit, as in Tur Abdin being the only major Christian areas left in Turkey outside of Istanbul.
  • I have lowercased every instance of "Defence" except for the first.
Changed the lead by moving around some text to resolve the second to last point. Surayeproject3 (talk) 18:24, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Background

[edit]
  • First paragraph seems good. A lot of these sources (albiet much less than Azakh) are paid/offline so I will trust that these are accurate. I have checked the rest myself.
  • What is source 15 (Svenska Dagbladet) exactly? Is it a recounting? Also armed themselves for war feels a bit odd for wiki, so perhaps omit "for war" or replace it with "for the upcoming defence".
  • He gathered weapons from Yazidis and information from Armenian and Assyrian survivors who were rescued from neighboring villages. This is unreferenced.
  • Is it necessary to mention/wikilink Turks, Kurds, and Mhallami ethnicities instead of the particular forces? Feels a bit odd.
  • No need to wikilink Midyat twice.
  • told the government that they didn't have enough soldiers to attack both areas What government? Doesn't seem very clear.
Signing so I can reply below in a bit. Surayeproject3 (talk) 19:34, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheBritinator Svenska Dagbladet is a retelling of the Defense of Iwardo, I've changed the sentence to your second suggestion. Last sentence of the second paragraph is cited to Akdemir from memory. Unlinked ethnicities and Midyat and changed the last sentece to "...the leader of the Midyat area, reported that..." Surayeproject3 (talk) 20:36, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. Sorry for the slow progress, I'm very busy. I will try to finish by the end of the week. TheBritinator (talk) 13:11, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Preparations and defence

[edit]
  • Who is Bishop Abdalahad? I can't seem to find any mention of that name on the cited page or anywhere else.
  • a counterattack was staged against the 13,000 strong force Who counterattacked who?
  • I've wikilined gendarmes for you.
  • and in one episode of assault, were able to kill 50 Turks including a high-ranking officer Change to "during one assault, they were able to inflict 50 Turkish casualties, including a high-ranking officer."
  • I think I mentioned this already but I'm a bit confused about how Ottoman and Turk is used seemingly interchangeably. Are they referring to the same force, or are they something else? If the former, then please just stick to Ottoman, its much easier to understand.
  • leading to many deaths on both sides deaths > casualties
  • Their resistance lasted 52 days and ended in success Change to "They successfully resisted for 52 days".
  • but was at least 1,000 add "it" after but
  • Food supplies were starting to run low or already had by the end of the siege? People starving to death would suggest the latter.
Fixed some of the word choice issues. Will respond to everything else in a bit. Surayeproject3 𖢗 16:25, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TheBritinator
  • On page 165 of the cited source, it states Bishop Abdlahad, who was given a sign27 of victory by the fighters, used religious language to interpret this incredible victory: God has brought this victory, because it is easy for God to do so (see stanza 156).
  • Earlier in the "Background" section of the article, it states that Therefore, the Kurds of Tur Abdin and Ramman, under the generalship of Ahmed Agha and Salem Agha, gathered a force of 13,000 men in Mardin.; the counterattack was made against the same force.
  • The cited source for the food supplies states that many had starved to death in conjunction with the supplies running low. It is just what the source says from what I could see looking again.
  • I will switch to a larger use of "Ottoman" in the article. Surayeproject3 𖢗 16:30, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Cool. It would appear that "Abdalahad" is misspelled then. TheBritinator (talk) 16:35, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just now fixed this. Surayeproject3 𖢗 17:11, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath

[edit]
  • Not sure wikilinking Gülgöze, Midyat as a section header is necessary but it isn't a problem.
  • You should mention who Hannibal Travis is.
  • The memories of the resistance and the gaboro of Iwardo are encountered in Assyrian news sources such as Suroyo TV and a book published by Xalaf Bar-Dawud Do you mean "recounted"?
  • which details its story Change to "its events"
  • Maybe you can wikilink to denial of the genocide? Not sure if that's its own article or a section of it.
  • Like the defence of Azakh Change to "Similarly to the defence of Azakh"