Constantinople was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greek history on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
"Parts of Michael Gove's levelling-up plan 'copied from Wikipedia'". The Independent. 3 February 2022. Retrieved 3 February 2022. One off-beat part of the report reads: "Constantinople was the capital of the Roman/Byzantine Empire (330-1204 and 1261-1453), the Latin Empire (1204-1261) and the Ottoman Empire (1453-1922)". The text is identical to the first line of the Wikipedia page for Constantinople, right down to formatting and punctuation.
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: No consensus. Relisting would probably not create a consensus for this change given the strong opposing arguments. Some supporting arguments are contingent upon a possible future split/page creation. Further discussion might be more productive with a new proposal, such as a WP:PROPSPLIT, or Constantinople → Constantinople during the Byzantine Empire (possibly with Constantinople redirecting to Istanbul). (non-admin closure) SilverLocust (talk) 05:48, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Constantinople → Byzantine Constantinople – As discussed above, a separate article for the "Ottoman Constantinople" may be created due to the large amount of content and potential expansion. This article thus needs to be renamed to distinguish it from that period. Aintabli (talk) 04:23, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support, as per my position in the discussion above. Wikipedia uses Constantinople for the Ottoman period, and the current state of this article seems to not understand that. Expansion is an option, but it seems there is more willingness for a split, which is also fine by me. Making Istanbul the summary article for both (Byzantine and Ottoman Constantinople), is also a good idea. Uness232 (talk) 07:00, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, my support is contingent upon there also being an Ottoman Constantinople article, and the corresponding reduction of the present article's scope, otherwise this does not make sense. Constantine ✍ 17:10, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also to clarify, this was our starting point. It was to create a new article for the Ottoman period and revise this article so that it is only on the Byzantine period, its original scope, which hereby, the name would clearly reflect that. Then, all would be summarized in Istanbul and History of Istanbul. I think this would be quite valuable, as anyone specifically fascinated by the Byzantine history would not have to worry about skipping parts on later periods while reading this article. Aintabli (talk) 18:28, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A long and storied history is no reason to downgrade a recognizable common name like Constantinople in favor of Wikipedia inventions like Byzantine Constantinople. Even if there's a consensus for this, I'd suggest alternatives likes Constantinople under/during the Byzantine Empire. --Killuminator (talk) 15:34, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, isn't the alternative you proposed the same as moving the article after all? Constantinople is Istanbul, and moving this article wouldn't be downgrading a recognizable name. Constantinople could redirect to Istanbul. It is very clear that since Constantinople as a name was also used for the Ottoman city, this has caused a lot of confusion regarding the original scope of this article. Aintabli (talk) 18:13, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The alternative is merely what I think to be a better name if there's consensus to move, not an endorsement of moving the page. Killuminator (talk) 18:38, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no need for a move even if an "Ottoman Constantinople" article is created.★Trekker (talk) 15:44, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you understand the predicament we're in. If an Ottoman Constantinople page is created without moving, we'd have a Constantinople article with a bafflingly severe lack of coverage for 1/3 of its history, and a separate Constantinople page for the Ottoman Empire, even though Wikipedia refers to the Ottoman city as just Constantinople. We'd have to pipe every link, or rewrite this page. Uness232 (talk) 16:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There is only one "Constantinople" article. And links to "Constantinople" will continue to redirect here. It seems unnecessary. This article covers the Ottoman period, if briefly. If you want to expand the Ottoman section, go ahead. But until there is a separate article, this should be the name for this one. Walrasiad (talk) 16:29, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't even planned to cover the Ottoman period. As noted on Byzantium, Istanbul was intended to be the article for the Ottoman period. This was later and even just now forgotten and misinterpreted based on the name of this article. Aintabli (talk) 18:01, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Walrasiaduntil there is a separate article There will be a new article if this move happens. I'm currently not in the position to write such a major article, but I was going to start working on it just next Monday. Aintabli (talk) 18:16, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Constantinople to Istanbul and move this article to something else. Beshogur (talk) 17:26, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So, this is essentially a support for the move, but "Constantinople" should redirect to Istanbul? Aintabli (talk) 18:04, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I support the redirect because Constantinople is noted in bold in Istanbul article. No opinions on the remaining. Beshogur (talk) 19:19, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We should have an article at this title, whatever sub-articles we have. Srnec (talk) 02:39, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify my point... If it isn't an article, 'Constantinople' will be either a dab page (terrible idea) or a primary redirect (almost as bad). I understand the motivation to treat it as a synonym of 'Istanbul', but in practice usage is basically non-overlapping. There is precedent for the current situation at Königsberg, Edo and Tenochtitlan. I'll also point out that the city wasn't Byzantine for the entire period 330–1453. Srnec (talk) 20:31, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well in this case Adrianople redirects to Edirne, however we have examples as Nicaea and İznik as well. However those examples you showed (like Nicaea) are abandoned settlements, while old Constantinople is still inhabited by people. Thoughts on that? Beshogur (talk) 17:44, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Königsberg is still inhabited and Byzantium is also a separate article. Srnec (talk) 03:03, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well this means we have now three different articles for Istanbul/Constantinople/etc. Beshogur (talk) 09:16, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there's no point moving this, either expand the article or create sub articles to address this—blindlynx 12:00, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Mellk (talk) 13:24, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per discussion, primary for historical importance, and common name. Randy Kryn (talk) 15:55, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Since the page has not been moved, we now need an expansion of the Ottoman section. I'm not in a place to do this alone, especially since most of the article needs additions, but with a few helping hands it should be possible. I would not want to ping anyone, but I suppose for a highly visible page the sooner the better. Uness232 (talk) 10:34, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It states that the map [Byzantine Constantinople-en.png] corresponds to the modern Day "Fatih" district - this is wrong Fatih is around hill 4 on the Map, BUT there are many other modern day districts also within the area described. Best to remove the legend altogether and just say the area within the theodosian walls. Zekimurad (talk) 12:06, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No you're incorrect. This is map of Fatih. Beshogur (talk) 12:18, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're thinking of the colloquial center/quarter. Not the entire district. Uness232 (talk) 14:36, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Shoulded the first sentence define what Constantiople was, not what it became. I think that the part "Constantinople (see other names) became the capital of the Roman Empire..." should be somtheling like "Constantinople (see other names) was a city, that became the capital of the Roman Empire..." AT44 (talk) 10:23, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg)
