Hello Mehmet, welcome to Wikipedia. You might like to start by reading the tutorial and introducing yourself at the new users page. If you have any questions, you can ask at the help desk or on my talk page. Two useful tips are that you can sign your name using four tildes (~~~~) and you can preview your changes before you save using the show preview button. You can regularly find new tips on the Community Portal. I look forward to reading your great articles and I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian. :) Angela . 03:13, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

For the record I do not use Mehmet, in Turkey I go by Atakan, and in the U.S. by ato. Let's try this ~~~~ thingy ;-). Ato 03:40, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Counter apology

Hi, Ato, yeah, i came on pretty strong, but no, i do not think there is reason for you to apologize to me, and the "offense" involved is a quite abstract one.

And everything else i may say belongs in this context: your temperate response makes clear that you are, as the expression goes "a gentleman and a scholar": very responsible, polite, and "professional" in the higher sense that applies to the best of both amateur and literally professional scholars. And in case i left any doubt about it, in what i wrote, i am very glad you're here; welcome to our community of scholars.

I maintain a little of a split personality in this Armenian-genocide matter, with something of a wall between the professional and the political.

I consider that you and i share a common culture, modern culture (which owes a disproportionate amount in the last 5 centuries to west and central Europe, and also has as important aspects much, for instance, from the heyday of Islamic culture and from 20th-century Turkey). Politically (and personally) i am horrified by the official Turkish position, and seek to contribute to an atmosphere in our culture that pressures the Turkish state, Turkish society, and individuals participating in Turkish society toward the (really tough) task of coming to terms with (instead of denying) what is in their "heritage". (I suppose that psychologically i am unusually sensitive to such issues from the knowledge that my own ancestors include people ethnicially associated with each "side" of a genocide (not the Armenian one).) So, as i say, i would expect not to be able to like you, because the tension between what is no doubt your winning personality, and my desire to see you transcend your background at least far enough to be embarrassed to talk about Turkish citizens as a whole, would amount to an enormous conflict of interest for me. If we were working together in the same city, i would find someone else to go out for chai with.

On the other side of the wall, our respective political outlooks are irrelevant to our scholarly task, because we are here to do an NPoV thing, and our setting aside our politics in what we produce normally makes our politics invisible.

I took the liberty of bending that scholarly rule by expressing my sympathy with the resentments of the (apparent) ethnic Armenian whose edits you reverted, in order to acknowledge the legitimacy and (more to the point) depth of those feelings, and thereby avoid the impression that my support for you was a denial or passive dismissal of that legitimacy and significance. IMO it was worth hoping that that clarified the situation for that one editor, despite the risk of offending you, but it's a subjective question and i am receptive to criticism of my decision.

So did i want a response from you? Ideally and on the politicial side, of course, i'd be pleased to find you grappling with the issue of how to talk about Turkish-Armenian relations. But i regret any interferance with our neutral political point of view, and (within the limits imposed by all i've already said, which would make an "unreserved" or "unqualified" apology an ugly pretense), i hope you'll accept my apology for my breach of scholarly courtesy, and understand my insistence on refusing your apology on the grounds that, between scholars, you have nothing to apologize for.

Ya know, i talk too much; hope i'm not driving you crazy. Thanks for writing. [smile] --Jerzy (t) 19:45, 2004 Jul 1 (UTC)

Ato, I understand that folks like Chirac are attempting to use the Armenian Genocide to justify their racism towards to Turkey and Turks. The link does belong though. Looking through the history of the Armenian Genocide article, it looks like you've been through there once or twice. Do you have any suggestions on resolving this? Stargoat 14:02, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi Ato, I noticed that page because I was searching Google for the text that is added by the editing toolbar using the links at User:Angela/useful stuff#Toolbar experiments. The page contained something like "bold text" or "link title". See the new page at Wikipedia:How to spot vandalism for more details. Angela . 18:11, Jul 30, 2004 (UTC)

NP

Hey, NP. It worked itself out.

UKL

Hi. I just rolled you back on Ursula K. Le Guin. Nothing personal, it's just that (as stated on Wikipedia:Manual of Style (titles)), italics are for book titles and inverted commas are for short story titles. It wasn't that the page was being inconsistent. Cheers, –Hajor 22:01, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)