Talk:Cyprus/Archive 3

message: I find that the "Education in Cyprus" section is in need for some cleanup, maybe even a rewrite. Some things quoted there (for example, that the Greek education system is being followed by GC schools) are simply wrong, while the language used could use some cleanup. I don't feel capable of doing this myself, not only because of my not-so-good English. Could someone with sufficient knowledge in the subject please volunteer?
Also, a final request: Please stop the vandalism! I just spent 10 minutes removing several irrelevant mentions of the term "Northern Cyprus" from the text. I know the political problem can cause many people loose their cool headedness, but this is getting ridiculous. It also eventually turns the article into a mess.
--Respiridus 14:36, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Education section cleanup?

message: Politics of the EU and the exclusion of the Northern Turkish Cypriots
Since Cyprus entered the EU, the Republic of Cyprus government has spoken for both sides of the Island (even though EU acquis has been suspened in the North). Northern Turkish Cypriots are classed as EU citizens. 
Unfortunatly the Turkish Cypriots living in the North do not get to vote, they can partipate in EU educational programmes, but without
Republic of Cyprus validation of northern Cyprus universities  then Turkish Cypriots cannot in fact participate, Turkish is not an officail EU lanaguage, which is a barrier to them passing concours (Exams to become a EU officails).
The Republic of Cyprus government would argue that the Turkish Cypriots exclude themselves, but they voted for the Annan plan. It was the vote against by the Greek Cypriots which lead to this situation and the exclusion of the people of the North from the democratic institutions of the EU. As the EU is commited to democracy then there is a wider problem beyond that of the politics of the Island
The following is an extract from a paper published by Friends of Europe, a EU thinktank. 
"It is the Cypriot 'catch-22'. Without a comprehensive settlement – for which
the Turkish Cypriots voted two years ago – they have no democratic voice.
They cannot force the Greek Cypriot side to come seriously back to the
negotiating table. Meanwhile, the Greek Cypriots say they (the Turkish
Cypriots) cannot have democratic representation within the EU today unless
they give in totally to Greek Cypriot demands and become a minority within
the Republic of Cyprus without a settlement."
http://www.friendsofeurope.org/download/Friends_of_Europe_Turkey_and_the_EU_Four_Scenarios_from_Train_Crash_to_Full_Steam_Ahead.pdf
What do people think?
--SolDrury 12:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I think this is an important issue and would like it to be included in the main text of the article

message: Under the section under general information, there are two links to Cyprus-conflict.net
Good though the site is, I don't think it warrentees two links.
--SolDrury 12:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two references

message: I was just reading through the article and came across this two-sentence paragraph in the Geography section: "The central plain (Mesaoria) with the Kyrenia and Pentadactylos mountains to the north and the Troodos mountain range to the south and west. There are also scattered but significant plains along the southern coast."
I don't really feel qualified to edit it myself, but that just sounds like its missing some link to explain why that it is just thrown out there. Blinutne 04:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Short paragraph in the Geography section 

message: "In July 1974, after a coup, Turkey invaded Cyprus and has ever since occupied the northern part." 
The coup is mentioned almost as a passing afterthought - why are important details being brushed over? Are you creating an encyclopaedia page or a campaign brochure?
Who carried out the coup, the Smurfs? Now I am sure you will say that has been covered in other sections, but the attempt to minimalise unpalatable truths while repeating the aspects that suit you superfluously makes a mockery of the entire page;.
It would be very useful if people making comments on objectivity vs. non objectivity could voice a specific recommendation. The coup in Cyprus was initiated by the Greek dictatorship (Junta) present in Greece at the time, in co-ordination with the Turkish generals and supported by the UK Foreign Office and Henry Kissinger. The operation of the Turkish army has been labeled by the International Community through numerous UN Resolutions as an invasion that is illegal so it is hardly under dispute (except by Turkey). This is well documented elsewhere and doesn't change at all the content of the document. Please be specific if you have real edits, together with some real information documenting what change you would like to see and exactly why.
:I'm a bit confused by your reference to the coup. Are you saying it was legal or acceptable? Clearly it was not and the fact that it was supported by other outside forces further suggests it was an attempted interference by these forces in to Cyprus. Furthermore, it is a fact, that even though the invasion may not have been justified, it was in fact proceded end this coup and restoration of democracy (of course, maybe this would have happeneded anyway). While this does not excuse the Turkish later actions, this does not change that fact. Also I can find not reference to your claim that the Turkish generals were involved in the planning of the coup on wikipedia. Nil Einne 09:04, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political Division 

message: The island was under Venetian control for four and a half centuries (1204 to  1669), far longer than it was ruled by the Ottoman Empire.
Does anyone know of whether the Greek language spoken there shows influence of Venetian-dialect Italian? Dogru144 13:41 28 July 2006 (UTC)
Cypriots, like Cretans, throw around the word "Che" constantly when they speak, which is not Greek and is presumably Italian. They also have some phonemes in their dialects, such as "j" which do not exist in Greek but do exist in Italians, so there is definetely an Italian influence in these dialects.
-Kwstis
Turkish Cypriots also has a distinct dialect which is quite original. But introduction of many sattlers from mainland
this distict dialect is endangered.
--mcyp 19:33, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regional variation of Greek language 

message: Even the briefest of glances through the article is sufficient to see this page is being used as an opportunity to campaign. For examples sake, this is hardly encyclopaedic language:
"but they are widely resented by Turkish Cypriots who regard them as Anatolian undesireables."
In its present form, this page fails to adhere to even the loosest standards of objectivity.
== Worth a re-write by someone in the know ? No it is not worth a re-write.
It's clear that there are nuances in the history of the island of Cyprus that lead an article such as this to be better written by someone who understands those nuances.
However, I do suggest a re-write, not only to get the political balance right (which is fairly self-evidently needed anyway), but also to try to get a proper balance between the geography and the political.  What I mean is that the word "Cyprus" is the name of an island.  However, the majority of this article deals with a country called the "Republic of Cyprus", which is different.  It's fine to try to merge things together (it might be difficult otherwise!), but the way things stand, there is too much fudging of language going on, when more clarity would be good.
A specific: the opening paragraph of this article stated that Cyprus is a member of the EU.  I changed this to read that the Republic of Cyprus is a member (because, never mind the "TRNC" issue, Cyprus is an island and not a country, and they are not the same thing as the UK SBAs are not a part of the EU).  
This may be hugely pedantic of me, but I thought I'd jot it down here, just in the hope that other pedants can agree with me.  Alas, I am not one in the know if the nuances of the history, and whilst I could make a bash at getting the balance right, as I have described above, I am not in a good place to start I think.  Thoughts from others ? --Phillip Fung 11:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Emotive Language 

message: :In considering the outcome it is interesting to note that whilst the Turkish settlers (who make up the majority in the occupied north) were allowed to vote, the refugees who had fled Cyprus had no right to vote in a referendum which would ultimately determine their future (their right to return and right to their property).
I changed colonists to settlers but still feel this line, which is not even referenced is not NPOV. Nil Einne 08:37, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referendum 

message: Any discussion about the Cyprus issue should include the anti Turkish Cypriot violence that occured during these years, this article convieniently skipped from 63 to 74 as if nothing had happened and the Turks invaded becuase they needed some exercise. I added neutral language, I corrected the number of GCs that were displaced (that number gets higher in every cyprus article) and I changed 'Murdered' to 'Killed'. Most of the GC dead were members of the military and militas...you dont muder a soldier in battle you kill him. Adam777 23:42, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, only GCs militants died between 1963-74... And also only TCs civilians died... as if Denctas did not have an armed group...! lol... talking about neutrality... Hectorian 01:00, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yawn.....go back and read the article prior to my edit. The years 63 to 74 were skipped over. Adam777 02:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  63 to 74 

message: I would like to write an article about the island itself.  How should it be titled, Cyprus (island) or Cyprus Island? - GilliamJF 12:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cyprus (island) should be the title. However be careful not to replicate too much information that is already containted in the country article - otherwise someone will probably just propose to merge the two. --Mattarata 01:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I think that this should be the article for the island. Placing the Greek Cyprus as THE Cyprus is clearly POV. Anyone else have thoughts on the matter? -- Chef Ketone 03:42, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Just take a look at China and Ireland as precedence. -- Chef Ketone 03:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should move this article to "Republic of Cyprus." Thoughts? -- Chef Ketone 03:45, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Island and state articles I recommend that Gillian simply edit the article Geography of Cyprus. As for splitting the article, I oppose because it is the POV of the international community that there is on Cypriot state. NPOV doesn't mean "no point of view," it means "neutral point of view," and neutral parties to the conflict don't recognize the Turkish puppet state. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 16:05, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, isn't it POV to say Northern Cyprus is a puppet state? Turkey does recognize Northern Cyprus, and in my opinion that alone justifies making a neutral (geographic) article for Cyprus, and putting the entry on Greek Cyprus on a separate article (Republic of Cyprus). The vast majority of the world recognizes only the People's Republic of China, but Wikipedia has chosen to make China a neutral/geographic article. So, even if the vast majority of the world only recognizes the Republic of Cyprus, shouldn't we follow precedent? - Chef Ketone 19:00, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geographic island article title 

message: I remember when a Cypriot won a Gold Medal at the 1990 Commonwealth Games.  At the Ceremony, the neutralist Cyprus flag was raised....to the strains of the GREEK National Anthem.  More recently, at the Australian (Tennis) Open, there were numerous Greek supporters of a Cypriot tennis player waving Greek Flags emblazoned with anti-Turk slogans and place names that they claim as Greece (and not just Cyprus, but also CONSTANTINOPLE).  Kind of makes a clear statement, doesn't it? 
Papadopoulos does not have my respect because I have never heard him (a) renouce Enosis as a goal for Cyprus, (b) push to change the National Anthem of Cyprus to show that his country is independent and not a puppet of Greece, (c) reduce the number of Greek Flags vis-a-vis the Cyprus flag, and (d) reach out to the Turkish Cypriots both at home and abroad - after all, if he says that he is the President of ALL of Cyprus, then those people are his fellow countrymen and he is supposed to be their cheif public servant.  However, I don't think that it will happen.  Expatkiwi
:What you fail to understand is that Turks in Cyprus are an ethnic minority and should be treated as such (in the same way the Albanians in the Republic of Macedonia, the Kurds in Turkey or the Hungarians in Romania are treated).--Tekleni 23:01, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  And how exactly should ethnic minorities 'be treated'? As we are now all EU citizens perhaps we should do away with such concepts are ethnic minorities, or should cypriots in the UK be categorized as such. We can all remember how Cyprus treated its ethnic minorities in the past but I for one would prefer to see no more mass graves. Adam777 13:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See my reply to Expatkiwi's message on my talkpage here.--Tekleni 14:13, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To Adam777: I, for one, would prefer to never see things like these ever again... Hectorian 22:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see Hectorian in your haste to label all that oppose any form of attoricity in Cyprus as 'Turkish' that you completely failed to read my comment. Did I specify 'WHOSE' mass graves,or individual graves for that matter, I was refering to?  I've read through a lot of your edits and they are mostly common sense, so I'll assume you dont subscribe to Teklenis notion of minority rights for minoritys in this massive European state we all now inhabit? If so there are a lot of Cypriots (and Greeks,  Turks, Germans, French, Icelanders etc etc) who will have to get the hell out of the UK and go home. It does help when we actually THINK about our statements first dont you agree. Adam777 00:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if i have misunderstoond your comment. The link i posted also has to do with minory issues in a state that wants to enter the EU... As for the 'mass graves' that u said above, there is nothing different to say than 'common sense': such things should never happene again, no matter to whom! But the reality in this section of this talk is about ethnic minorities and if the TCs are one, right? well, since both u and me live in the European state, i guess u will agree that if the TCs should be granted equal power with the GCs (though they only form 18% of the population), the Kurds in Turkey would also be granted equal powers with the Turks, right? Hectorian 02:36, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Attitudes

message: Please people, when we put a name in italics or quotes its POV, when we use weasel words its POV - its always the same few people trying to impose their highly biased viewpoints on Cypriot related articles. We can point out the TRNC is illegal without the theatrics (you know who you are). Adam777 16:48, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That was me and I honestly didn't notice. Personally, I have no problem with the normal font. However, kindly tone down, and read WP:AGF and ...WP:AAGF that is...) •NikoSilver• 20:43, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's why I'm using italics. If I wanted to be POV, I'd use "scare quotes" (as in "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus").--Tekleni 20:45, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV Reminders 

message: Neither the "Country studies" site, nor the cited U.S. Library of Congress are 'inaccurate' sources. I expect Aristovoul0s and Adam777 to find a way to add both inside the article. If it is not done by tomorrow, I'll do it myself. Thanks. •NikoSilver• 09:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of refugees

message: The map for this country has recently been changed to a format which is not standard for Wikipedia. Each and every other country identifies that country alone on a contintental or global map; none of them highlight other members of relevant regional blocs or other states which which that country has political or constitutional links. The EU is no different in this respect unless and until it becomes a formal state and replaces all other states which are presently members; the progress and constitutional status of the EU can be properly debated and identified on the page for that organisation; to include other members of the EU on the infobox map for this country is both non-standard and potentially POV.
Please support me in maitaining Cyprus's proper map (in Wikipedia standard) until we here have debated and agreed this issue? Who is for changing the map and who against? The onus is on those who would seek to digress from Wiki standard to show why a non-standard and potentially POV map should be used. Cyprus deserves no less! JamesAVD 15:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not discuss here, but at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries so a uniform decision can be reached. Kusma (討論) 15:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-standard and potentially POV map should be reverted