Hoi,
If their identity is secure, what reason is there for the minority of the Turkish citizenry to not stand up for the overwhelming verification in scientific historical literature?
Minorities don't win edit wars. If they get even close to win... they get banned for vandalism, and that's it. That's the way a wiki works and we all find it normal.
The issue here is about a minority POV that is locally a majority and we want out (as a minority). I.e., it's a matter of WHO has the ultimate power on info generation.
If there are "global truths" (as dictated by the "global majority"), then any single edition can be forced to trim its local POVs, if not, they can keep their POV. So far we have no way to define any "global truth".
BTW, we have no warranty that defining such a truth would generate information mirroring what the potential reader perceives as "true". We would only impose the will of OUR OWN majority on a subject. It's a complicated issue, as it happens any time you deal with the boundary between personal and social freedom.
Besides, what happens with zxx.wiki, if the people of zxx-land are kept from writing what they perceive as "objectively true" and are forced to write what "some strangers out there" write in their media? Would en.wiki accept the POV of radical Islamites, just because it's many of them on earth? I kind of doubt it would...
I'm afraid in such situations all you can require (while remaining in the ranks of mutual respect) is a box telling that "this is a local position that is not reflecting what most of other editions publish on the same issue" (plus maybe a short explanation).
But it cannot be made casually; it must be the result of proper content analysis, made by independent third parties. That is, once more we would need something like a "Meta-Arbitration Committee".
I can't think of a single nation whose history programs are clean from relics of nationalism. So if you start that engine be prepared to a number of those boxes popping out here and there.
IMHO, it would have the nice effect of telling "national" public opinions, who are often artificially kept in insulation from the mainstream POV, that other stories are told "out there". It wouldn't change much in the short run, but it may make a difference in the long run.
Berto 'd Sera Personagi dl'ann 2006 per l'arvista american-a Time (tanme tuti vojaotri) http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html