Talk:Russo-Turkish War (1735–1739)

Too much propaganda. This article has to be rewritten. (unsigned by anon)

Please be more specific, or just go ahead and rewrite it. -Irpen 06:30, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
One can but agree with anon. Let me be more specific about the propaganda!! This article has been joined with the article on the 1735-1739 Austria-Ottoman Wars and totally ignores the Austrian advances and then a series of defeats, just giving in a single sentence on a series of disastrous defeats. The defeats of the Austrian armies at Bucharest, Battle of Banja Luka (August 1737) and further at Battle of Grocka (July 1739) and the retaking by Ottomans of Belgrade after a siege are totally missed.Noyder (talk) 18:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP 85.103.29.87's opinion of "Ottoman victory"

I would like to see the source(s) for this "Ottoman victory" that the IP 85.103.29.87 has edit-warred into the article. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:02, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources failing WP:V

@Patrockk:
Three journal articles used as sources do not appear in the journals listed.

As seen here. There is no article by Aksan, Virginia H. "The Ottoman Empire and the Russian Frontier, 1739-1742." The International History Review 11, no. 3 (1989): 481-502. Instead:

As seen here or here There is no article by Fisher, Alan W. "The Russo-Turkish War of 1735-1739 " The Slavonic and East European Review 37, no. 90 (1959): 321-339. Instead:

As seen here there is no article by Kafadar, Cemal. "The Ottoman Empire in the Eighteenth Century: Tradition and Change in a Muslim Society." The Journal of Asian Studies 41, no. 3 (1982): 561-583. Instead:

These sources;

  • Ortaylı, İlber. The Ottoman Empire and the World Around It.
  • Davies, Norman. Europe: A History.
  • The Russian Empire and the Ottoman Empire, 1710-1922, by Alexander Shlyapnikov.
  • The Russo-Turkish Wars of the Eighteenth Century, by Richard B. Spence.
  • The Romanovs: 1613-1918, by Simon Sebag Montefiore.

contain no page numbers therefore fail WP:V.

A clarification of said journal articles, page numbers for the books and quotes from all these sources will resolve this issue.--Kansas Bear (talk) 02:17, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox results

I amended the infobox per Template:Infobox_military_conflict#Parameters, which states results need to be either x victory or inconclusive. If the results do not fit into those parameters, the article should instead link to the aftermath in the text body. Annwfwn (talk) 12:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Objection

Hello, thank you for your understanding about the Azak Fortress, but I have to object to some of your statements. First of all, you say that the Erhan source is correct and I agree with that and I know that this source was there before and I did not add it. But this source (as you also said it was correct) said that the Azak Fortress was destroyed and I added some sources to support this source. Your criticism of me is that the sources I added are primary sources, but I added these sources to support the already existing secondary source. As for the Zaparozhye part, I will say the following:The Zaporozhian region officially came under Russian protection with the Pereyaslav Agreement in 1654. This status was solidified by the Treaty of Andrusovo in 1667 and the Eternal Peace Treaty of 1686. Therefore, prior to and during the 1735-1739 war, Zaporozhye was officially under Russian control. Asafviki (talk) 09:53, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your explanation but don't add these sources again because as I said they are not WP:RS and also I saw what you said cross, this is not Turkish Wikipedia. Turkish Wikipedia has many problems in terms of sources and losses and we shouldn't add the same things from Turkish Wikipedia here anyway thanks for your explanation happy editing. Kajmer05 (talk) 13:24, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

== Presenting the Russians as winning in the Ottoman-Russian war of 1735-1739

The Ottomans won the war of 1735-1739. When Russia formed an alliance with Austria and attacked the Ottoman Empire, the Ottoman Empire defeated Austria and captured the Danube Castle. Austria lost Posiva along with Serbia, Wallachia, Moldavia and Belgrade. As for the Russian sphere, the Russo-Turkish Treaty of Belgrade of 1739 gave Aviv to Russia and consolidated Russian control over Zaporizhia, but prohibited Russian fleets in the Sea of ​​Azov and the Black Sea. The Azov Fortress was destroyed and returned, and the area became neutral territory. The dominance of the castle was lost. Apart from this, Russia lost Crimea with the Treaty of Niš and gave up Moldavia in exchange for Zaporozhye, so the Russians won very little in this war compared to the Ottomans, so this war should be called an Ottoman victory because it provided more benefits against the Ottomans. Stone 2006, s. 64. ^ Mikaberidze 2011 Uzunçarşılı,İsmail Hakkı (1995), Osmanlı Tarihi IV. Cilt 1. Kısım:Karlofça Antlaşmasından XVIII. Yüzyılın Sonlarına Kadar', Ankara:Türk Tarih Kurumu 1995 (5. Baskı) ISBN 975-16-0015-4 Aktepe, M. Munir, (19), "Mahmud I", Islam Ansiklopedisi, Ankara:T.C.Maarif Vekaleti Cilt VII say.154-165. Sakaoğlu, Necdet (1999), Bu Mülkün Sultanları, İstanbul:Oğlak ISBN 978-975-329-300-6 say.334-335 Shaw, Stanford J. (1976), History of the Ottoman Empire and Modern Turkey. Vol.1 Empire of the Gazis: the Rise and Decline of the Ottoman Empire 1280-1808, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press ISBN 0-521-29163-1 Tarih sevdalısı 123 https://www.britannica.com/summary/Russo-Turkish-wars https://ppu.gov.ua/en/press-center/29-veresnia-1739-roku-pidpysana-belhradska-myrna-uhoda-iaka-zavershyla-rosiysko-turetsku-viynu-1735-1739-rokiv/ https://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CR%5CU%5CRusso6Turkishwars.htm (talk) 18:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that your verdict on the outcome is WP:OR. The article presents sources claiming the victory of the Russians. The Ottomans' achievements should be considered successes only against the Austrians, yes, the Russians received limited advantages, but, as Nelipovich (2010) noted, they were significant in stating that Russia had won. In addition, Crimea and Moldova were not part of Russia during the war, they occupied them, then exchanged them for significant territories. Dushnilkin (talk) 21:04, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just like in the Astrakhan Expedition of 1570, Russia was successful militarily and the Ottomans was successful diplomatically. Moreover, the sources I mentioned do not say that Russia had very few rights and that Russia won a decisive victory. The Russians already lost this war because of the Austrians, and in your research it is not possible to find that Russia is definitely superior. They traded important lands and concentrated their forces on these lands, but unfortunately this does not mean that they have an advantage. And I don't see how this isn't original. And I want to say this once again: Russia occupied very little land compared to the Ottomans.
Yes, this cannot be called a military victory for the Ottomans, but such matters do not only end in the military field.
https://www.prlib.ru/en/history/619583
https://historica.fandom.com/wiki/Russo-Turkish_War_of_1735-1739
It is also possible to see the Ottoman victory on some of these pages such as wikipedia. Tarih sevdalısı 123 (talk) 20:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are we supposed to appeal only to the sources that you own!? The article presents sources regarding both the Ottoman and Russian victory. So we can't state for sure, but we can clearly declare victory in the war thanks to successes on one front - WP:OR, read this rule. As for 1570, the issue appeared on the discussion page there, as a result, they came to the conclusion that it was not a "diplomatic victory" of the Ottoman state.
As for your sources, there is nowhere on the Yeltsin website (prilib ru) nowhere is the outcome stated, it is mentioned that due to Austria's failures, Russia was unable to use its successes, especially towards the end of the war. The second site is definitely WP:QUESTIONABLE, an analogue of Wikipedia, which should not be used together with real WP:RS. Dushnilkin (talk) 21:09, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In the Astrakhan campaign, the Russians defeated the Ottomans and took them between two fires, and it is said that 1/4 of the 80,000-strong Ottoman army returned. Thereupon, the Ottomans gave up the Don-Volga Canal Project in the peace treaty, but the Russians demolished the fortress on the Terek and allowed pilgrimage and trade convoys to pass through Central Asia, and Sokollu Mehmet Pasha continued the Ottoman superiority in the Black Sea by not allowing the Russians to enter anywhere east or west of the Black Sea. He established good relations with some states so that the Russians would not become even stronger and was successful. He successfully managed the peace treaty. If there is a strong diplomatic agreement against military victory in a war, the army cannot win. For example, let's say a militarily strong state conquers some lands of the state at war and sits at the peace table with the other state. For example, let's say it conquers 3 regions. Let's say the diplomatically strong state takes 2 regions. The other takes 1. Who wins now? The militarily strong state? No, this is nonsense. Apart from that, you said we will only look at your sources. Similarly, are we only going to look at your sources or your ridiculous objections? Russia gained less territory in this war compared to the Ottomans. Unfortunately, they lost diplomatically even though they won militarily. If Russia definitely took these places in other wars and won militarily, why did they gain less territory? If it weren't for Austria, the Russians would definitely have benefited more from this. I understand what you are trying to say. Since Russia won 1 war in this war, you are saying that Russia won militarily. This is ridiculous lol
I am not saying that there is a definite victory result on the first page I posted, I am just saying that the Russians came out of this agreement worse than the Ottomans and it is not hard to see this, read the last paragraphs of the page. Tarih sevdalısı 123 (talk) 13:33, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need to start a discussion here off topic, there is a separate page for this, but I will answer that: The Ottomans did not achieve what they eventually got, the Russians made these concessions precisely because they could save Astrakhan. These are attempts to smooth out the consequences of defeat. All your subsequent arguments make no sense, you refute a straw man, I have never stated anywhere that the Russians won militarily or otherwise, I explained to you why you cannot change the outcome by referring to your own arguments, which have no weight here, everything in the article changes only by referring to WP:RS, only in some cases can we discuss why some source is not reputable. Dushnilkin (talk) 06:09, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Let's not try to minimize the outcome of the war, it is obvious that it was an Ottoman victory, read the agreement. Let's say you didn't understand that either. Look at the changes, there are even those who say it was a Russian victory, it's funny. Tarih sevdalısı 123 (talk) 18:49, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Result of the war: Ottoman victory

The war aims of the Austrians and the Russians were the conquest of parts of the Balkans, Belgrade, and access to the Black Sea for Russia. These war aims were not achieved. The Ottomans had defended the Balkans and Belgrade. The Russians had two provinces, Azov and Zaporizhia, but no access to the Black Sea. The Ottoman main army was in the Balkans and had won the final battle (Treaty of Belgrade).

It's all in CHATGPT. Member2023 (talk) 21:25, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Russo-Turkish_War_(1735%E2%80%931739)