From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. It's snowing, and nom is sock blocked. Star Mississippi 14:06, 15 March 2022 (UTC) reply

Türk Kadinlar Birligi

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Türk Kadinlar Birligi (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not enough coverage to meet notability. MartinWilder ( talk) 19:49, 10 March 2022 (UTC) - Blocked sock. Beccaynr ( talk) 16:40, 12 March 2022 (UTC) reply

Keep The notability is made clear in the article. The main women's suffrage organization of any country is automatically notable. I have a hard time imagining how it could not be. It has sholarly references, and coverage on other language versions of Wikipedia. Of course, the article could be longer, but an article on Wikipedia is never finnished, and can be edited and expanded for years to come, by anyone. Wikipedia even allows the creation of stubs, and shorter articles than this has been allowed to remain if the subject is notable, which this obviously is. Is it not enough covered in English language sources online? That is hardly a criteria for notability. In that case many notable subjects from non English speaking countries would have to be deleted. I have a hard time describing why this article is notable, since its difficult to understand why it should not be. The most important (it may in fact be the only one, though the references does not spell it out) women's suffrage organization of a nation is not notable? Its difficult to understand why it would not be. I am astonished that the main suffrage organization of a country is not regarded notable. -- Aciram ( talk) 21:36, 10 March 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep I’ve added three references and there are plenty more. The organisation is well documented and its history discussed in numerous academic publications. Mccapra ( talk) 21:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep. An important historic organization. As Aciram and Mccapra explain, no case whatsoever for deletion. This nomination is disruptive. gidonb ( talk) 21:58, 10 March 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep My Turkish isn't what it should be, but this is clearly notable. A very cursory Google Books search shows half a dozen English-language monographs discussing it and Turkish coverage seems far more extensive. Atchom ( talk) 01:48, 11 March 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep - via the Wikipedia Library for Türk Kadinlar Birligi: An Evaluation towards the Teaching of History of Women in Turkey in the 20th Century: Turkish Women's Union and Activities. By: BELENLİ, Tuğba; KİRİŞ AVAROĞULLARI, Ayten. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Sciences. Dec2017, 19(2), p287-310. Language: Turkish. DOI: 023469120045477 (Abstract: The activities of the Turkish Women's Union in the framework of women's issues in Turkey in the 20th century constituted an important area of influence...); and there are several database-only records; On Proquest, sources include for Türk Kadinlar Birligi: Nicole A N M Van,Os. (2000). Ottoman women's organizations: Sources of the past, sources for the future. Islam & Christian Muslim Relations, 11(3) (includes discussion of "the Turk Kadinlar Birligi, which was founded in February 1924 by, amongst others, again Nezihe Muhittin", in historical context); Terzi, E. G. (2015). Ulus-devlet insa sürecinde kadinlarin siyasal haklari: Türkiye'de seçme-seçilme haklarina iliskin tartismalarda sömürgecilik sonrasi söylemin Izleri/The relationship between nation-state and women's political rights: The parliament discussions on political rights in 1934 and post-colonial discourse. Akademik Incelemeler Dergisi, 10(2) (appears to be the same); via the WP Library for Turkish Women's Union: Kaftan G. The Turkish Women's Movement in Abeyance. Journal of International Women’s Studies. 2020;21(6):184-195 (includes an overview of history and criticism of the group); this journal shows an alternative spelling of the group name is Turk Kadin Birligi, with a history of the group: Libal, Kathryn. “Staging Turkish Women’s Emancipation: Istanbul, 1935.” Journal of Middle East Women’s Studies 4, no. 1 (2008): 31–52 ( JSTOR). On Proquest, results for Turkish Women's Union include: Turkish women's union wins special films for children. (1926, Feb 04). New York Times (1923-), and another English translation of the name of the group: zak, U., & de Smaele, H. (2016). NATIONAL AND TRANSNATIONAL DYNAMICS OF WOMEN'S ACTIVISM IN TURKEY IN THE 1950S AND 1960S: The story of the ICW branch in ankara. Journal of Women's History, 28(3) (...By 1926, Muhittin's Türk Kadinlar Birligi (TKB, Union of Turkish Women) formally joined the International Woman Suffrage Alliance...). Based on this initial search, it appears ample references exist to support this article and its development, per WP:NONPROFIT and WP:ORGDEPTH. Beccaynr ( talk) 16:11, 12 March 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep The article justifies the information given about the organisation and the sources which are given make it notable. Foodie Soul ( talk) 12:05, 13 March 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Nominator is blocked as sock. And as per above topic clearly passes notability criteria. Jeni Wolf ( talk) 11:45, 14 March 2022 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Türk_Kadinlar_Birligi&oldid=1077279592"