Talk:Civilian casualties and displacements during the Cyprus conflict/Archive 1

message: On May 14, 2005, this article was nominated for deletion.  The result was keep rewrite, no consensus to delete. However, renaming to a less POV title may be in order.  See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Turkish Cypriot Genocide for a record of the discussion. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 22:15, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A new VFD isn't appropriate either, since the old one only closed a few days ago. NPOV the article and title, by all means. sjorford →•← 14:40, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: VfD

message: I've mentioned that TRNC is recognised only by Turkey at beginning so as not to repeat it through article, changed date genocide refers to from 63-64 to 63 - 74, I've reinstated that TC's were forced in 3% of Cyprus, the 3% does not refer to period of 63 - 74 but towards 74 when TC's fled due to assaults on villages by GC's. I've mentioned Akritas plan and added link, added links to Cyprus-conflict.net aswell. Removed Hellenic Genocide link, has no link with this article. Comments and edits welcome. --E.A 13:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've given the text another copy-edit, removed a link to Rauf Denktash (relevance?), moved external links to the correct section and identified them, etc. Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 14:10, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason i changed it is that the Akritas plan was not discovered until April 1966, which makes the events of 1963 separate (though in retrospect Turkish Cypriots see Akritas as the secret behind 63). --E.A 17:46, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure which edits you're referring to (the diff isn't of my edits). Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 18:25, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, probably pasted the wrong link, then. Hope this one is right.
Ah — that was a mistake (I used the admin rollback, and it obviously rolled back to the wrong place).  My apologies; I should have checked, but I was probably editing in a hurry (always a bad idea). Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 21:02, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

text: New Edits: Removed death tolls incurred by the invasion by Turkey, this article is about the events from 63 - 74 surrounding the Akritas plan before the inavsion. Mentioned Policarpos Yorgadjis involvement in Akritas plan (source: http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/narrative-main-2.htm). Removed Hellenic Genocide link, now defunct. Removed Turkish Invasion of Cyprus link, article is POV fork of Cyprus dispute. Re-instated book link. Argy if your going to edit, please check your edits, your chopping sentences and not completing them. --E.A 19:56, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: More edits: Added more detail on outbreak of violence in 60's, source:http://www.cyprus-conflict.net/narrative-main-%203.htm --E.A 23:28, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits 

message: Even leaving aside the frothings of irrelevance about Greek-Cypriot casualties (if this were an article of the Holocaust, would we accept a long section on how many German guards died and were injured?), there's much that's vague, stated as what "Greek Cypriots" and "Turkish Cypriots" believe.  I've never met a Greek Cypriot who denied that Turkish Cypriots were mistreated, forced out of their villages, attacked, killed, etc. — who are these deniers of whom the article speaks?  One doesn't have to believe that the Turkish invasion was justified in order to accept that the Greek Cypriot extreme right, aided and encouraged by the Greek fascists, were responsible for many barbarities against not only Turkish Cypriots, but Greek Cypriots left-wingers too.  The behaviour here of editors like Argyrosargyrou brings shame on Greek Cypriots, most of whom would repudiate his ridiculous views. Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 22:18, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no use talking to a Turkish apologist such as yourself. Famagusta was NEVER a Turkish Cypriot town. The popultion in 1973 was  25,307 Greek Cypriots and 6,120 Turkish Cypriots. The Turkish Cypriots that died in 1963/4 were mostly TERRORISTS who killed over 200 Greek Cypriots therefore the inclusion of the people they killed is fully justified. In 1974 Turks murdered 5000 Greek Cypriots, raped over 1,000 women and ethnically cleansed 200,000. Since there was an invasion going on and there is no evidence whosoever that retaliatory killings were genocide the inclusion of the Greek Cypriot death toll is fully justified. Since Rauf Denktash has admitted on television that during the violence the TMT terrorist organisation which he founded deliberately attacked Turkish Cypriot targets in order to lay false blame on the Greek Cypriots that should be inclded as well --Argyrosargyrou 22:31, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Present state of article 

message: A google search for "Turkish Cypriot Genocide" turns up a mere 9 hits.  "Greek Cypriot Genocide" actually turns up more, at 23.  Since both sides claim genocides occured, and the truth is probably neither of their versions, I don't think it's productive to have separate articles, which will just by POV-pushing. This should be merged into Cyprus dispute, and if there are more details that don't fit there, something like Displacements and alleged genocides during the Cyprus conflict, or some other suitably neutral title that discusses the allegations on both sides. --Delirium 00:08, May 31, 2005 (UTC)
:Actually, from what I can tell, there are no credible claims of "genocide" except from some extremist groups, so perhaps a title like Civilian casualties and displacement during the Cyprus conflict, or possibly something shorter, would be better. --Delirium 00:10, May 31, 2005 (UTC)
::EXCELLENT IDEA. A new article combining the previous two. Afterwards, the previous two articles should be deleted.  I like this title.(UNFanatic 00:38, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no opinion on the content of the articles mentioned -- my only interest is in factual accuracy, NPOV, and a great encyclopedia article. While no consensus was reached in the VfD process, it does appear that a new article or a merge would be less contentious, at least for this article, as the title of the article does itself express POV. I KNOW that most of the editors of this article express one POV or another, but, rather than an out-and-out edit ware, do the editors of this article think it's possible to hash out their differences on a discussion page (either here or in a new NPOV'd article) rather than on the main article space? --Chiacomo 01:18, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree to the idea as well. Sounds quite fair to put the two sides in one article, with both sides' alleged "genocides"/"ethnic cleansings" (however, I would be in favour of avoiding these terms when possible), and would propose to use the plural of displacement for grammar reasons: Civilian casualties and displacements during the Cyprus conflict. Time scope of the article should be 1963-1974/5 (withdrawal of TCs from government until almost total separation of communities). - Snchduer 08:04, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

text: I emphatically agree with that statement.  (UNFanatic 19:44, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Have to agree with this one, too. - Snchduer 11:55, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: Would you agree to have an article about Civilian casualties and displacements during the Cyprus conflict instead of the genocide article? Because that is what the dicussion is about currently - not about whether or not to have the atrocities presented. - Snchduer 13:57, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah i would agree to an article title along those lines, so long as persecution of TC's backed by GC government is adequately conveyed. --E.A 14:19, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should this article exist? 

message: Firstly, definitive statements imply that there is 100% agreement on the subject. It is better to say "this side or that side claimed" rather than taking info from a Greek or Turkish website: For example: 
:During this period, Turkish Cypriots claim they were forced out of government and its agencies by the Greek Cypriot authorities and into enclaves amounting to no more than 3% of the island. Many faced poverty stricken conditions. Greek Cypriots hold (claim) that the withdrawal of Turkish Cypriots from government was voluntary and that the movement of people in enclaves was out of choice.   My version.
:During this period, Turkish Cypriots were forced out of government and its agencies by the Greek Cypriot authorities and into enclaves amounting to no more than 3% of the island. (this is a definitive statement- reader will assume this is a Turkish viewpoint) Many faced poverty stricken conditions. Greek Cypriots hold that the withdrawal of Turkish Cypriots from government was voluntary and that the movement of people in enclaves was out of choice.
these are small examples, in addition to the title which at first glance would indicate that most or all Turkish Cypriots were killed, which was never  the case.  A distortion of History.  This article should be moved to the new title proposed by the other wikipedian. (UNFanatic 21:13, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: By all means feel free to edit what you deem unfair, i have already changed the language stated above. Note that your edits before left unfinished sentences such as: 
"Turkish Cypriots believe that had they not mounted an effective resistance in the form of the TMT (led by Rauf Denktas)." --E.A 21:34, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  OK 

message: Is there a citation for the use of the term "Turkish Cypriot Genocide"? Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 10:18, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of the term