Talk:Northern Cyprus/Archive 4

message: Deplores the declaration of the Turkish Cypriot authorities of the purported secession of part of the Republic of Cyprus
Considers the declaration referred to above as legally invalid and calls for its withdrawal;
Calls for the urgent and effective implementation of its resolutions 365 (1974) and 367 (1975);
Calls upon all States not to recognize any Cypriot state other than the Republic of Cyprus;
(Res. 541 (1983) of 18.11.83, oper. paras. 1,2,3,7) 
Calls once more on all states to respect the sovereignty, independence,territorial integrity and non-alignment of the Republic of Cyprus and urgently requests them, as well as the parties concerned, to refrain from any action which might prejudice that sovereignty, independence, territorial integrity and non-alignment, as well as from any attempt at partition of the island or its unification with any other country;
(Resol.367 (1975) of 12.3.1975 oper. paras. l,4,5,6,7)
Please pay special attention to the phrasing. Not a single line on TRNC. why do people here state that TRNC is called as such by all of the world? What makes people here think they know better than the U.N. and the Security Council. The whole world i would add is very careful to be politicaly correct and refer not as TRNC but as Turkish Cypriot authorities and the Republic of Cyprus. 
This article's Factual accuracy should be disputed.
:The alternative is for the TRNC to in fact be referred to as a terrorist-controlled region that has historically acted in a peaceful manner save toward their main rival, the Republic of Cyprus, since the Republic of Cyprus has de jure control of the region, and de facto lack of control.  Which do you think would lead to more headaches on the international political scene? --Chr.K. 18:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What does the Security Council state on this issue?

message: : I see once again that the notion of a de facto state has failed to be grasped by certain individuals. What information you provide is nothing more than redundancy confirming the lack of de jure recognition of TRNC throughout the world and is clearly poised to introduce bias. A de facto state is by its very nature already self-claimed, but it's a step too far to call it an occupation of another state right away.
: The same goes with the challenge of the very name of TRNC. Just a quick Google search revealed that the TRNC is mentioned in various international sources, including but not limited to:
:*US Department of State
:*US Library of Congress Research Center
:*EU Robert Schuman Foundation
:*Encyclopædia Britannica
: Further investigation is apt to reveal many more examples, but trying to prove the obvious gets boring quickly. 
: I was going to propose reverting your edits on the grounds that your reasoning was not sound, your allegations at factual accuracy dispute were unfounded and that your contribution overall was unconstructive and biased, but I see that it is already done. 
:Please try to dig the issue and related topics deeper before your next edit wave. Take care --Xasf 23:30, 16 August 2006 (GMT+3)
Personally, I think he's a bot. I don't think he can hear you. Zazaban 20:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And please leave reality to reality, not the UN Security Council.  They can make as many proclamations, pronouncements, and calls to tea and crackers as they like, and that doesn't bring a speck of land in northern Cyprus under the Cyprian Republic's control.  I apologize if this sounds antagonistic; it is hoped to get the other side's attention.  The Northern Cyprus region is NOT controlled by the Republic of Cyprus as of 5 September 2006. --Chr.K. 18:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Aristovoulos

message: Dear LawrenceTrevallion,
Thank you for your opinions on the subject, I am happy you have agreed with adding a sentence in a similar vein as to what the Security Council would suggest and I defend.
Please allow me to bring the following to your attention: For your point 1. If the only international organization responsible for providing exact definitions and status to an authority/state is the Security Council, then Wikipedia should support that!! and not any other definition that an author/editor may use. Otherwise wikipedia should state that it does not auspices the UN or its practices/rulings. Kindly note that the only recognized international organization responsible for providing status to an authority is the UN Security Council and it has deemed TRNC as “legally invalid and called for its withdrawal”.And deliberately refrains to call the Turkish Cypriot Community de facto State-government.
Therefore, in order to be politically correct, the article should refrain from using “de facto government/state” or even TRNC without noting the status given by the UN. I.e. “legally invalid TRNC” or “Self Declared” TRNC”.
In line with what has been said so far: The name, the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" (Turkish: Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti) was self-declared. The UN considers TRNC as legally invalid and calls for the withdrawal. It possesses an administration and infrastructure, located in the north of the Republic of Cyprus.
Or
The name, the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" (Turkish: Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti) was self-declared. The UN considers TRNC as legally invalid and calls for the withdrawal. It possesses an administration and infrastructure, located in the north of the Republic of Cyprus. The de jure Republic of Cyprus can not exert its authority over its northern third, because of the Turkish forces.
The reader understands that an authority that calls itself “Republic” illegally exists in the north of the Republic of Cyprus. The status is provided by the UN the mediator responsible for providing status. I trust the reason why I am providing this counteroffer is understood otherwise I can elaborate.
Additionally, I have proved my case with the issue of calling “ TRNC” a de facto state repeatedly because it was at the top of article, not because it is the only argument. Below I summarize points taken from the article that are highly controversial and factually inaccurate.
Its immediate predecessor from 1975 to 1983 was the Turkish Federative State of North Cyprus; but the leadup to its establishment started in 1963 with the collapse of the Cypriot community into two antagonistic camps.
Highly controversial, factual accuracy disputed. How can the author prove the above? TMT was stating “Cyprus is Turkish” due to the Turkish belief that "the British did not hold their part of the bargain" (Cyprus was leased to the British by the Ottomans) " but The British annexed and declared Cyprus as a British Colony while Cyprus should have been returned to the Ottoman Turks as early as 1913". The leadup to its establishment may well have started in 1913 when the British annexed Cyprus and broke the leasing agreement with the Ottomans.
“It can be considered a de facto state but with restricted outlets and international rights outside its borders”. I think there is no need I should dwell on that unless necessary. No, it can not be considered a de facto state. Who says so? With restricted outlets and international rights outside its border? What does this imply?
“Since the Annan plan referendum the UN has voiced its disappointment to the government of the Republic of Cyprus for the rejection of the plan, and refrained from referring to pre-Annan Plan resolutions[citation needed]”.
Blatant Factual Inaccuracy highly POV. What does this mean? And how can the author prove refrained from referring to pre-Annan Plan resolutions
Resolutions are issued every year. Did the author read them? Here as evidence the 2006 issue Titled "S/RES/1687 (2006) The situation in Cyprus" in the center of the page. http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_resolutions06.htm
On page 2 1. Reaffirms all its relevant resolutions on Cyprus….'
“The TRNC is also increasingly treated as a separate entity by major country analysts such as Economist Intelligence Unit and Jane's Intelligence”. Factual accuracy disputed. An attempt to "recognition" by the author. How can the author prove this? (increasingly treated)
“The TRNC has a population of about 200,000…. “
The article keeps referring to the “TRNC” a self proclamation-illegal. The Security Council refrains from calling the Turkish Authorities that. Turkish Authorities should take its place. Or if TRNC has to be kept then another word is required. Either “illegal”, or “self proclaimed”. Otherwise Wikipedia gives a different status to an illegal entity as dictated by the Security Council. Please read the link to the latest resolution by the UN and see whether TRNC is mentioned. Irrespective of whether the illegality is mentioned somewhere in the article, TRNC is de facto higly controversial statement.
History? I remember posting the Thirteen amendments. Why where my posts reverted? No justification, of any kind. Someone just reverted them. Since the article makes the argument that
“Tensions increased when Makarios proposed thirteen amendments to the constitution of the Republic of Cyprus” and that “Turkish Cypriots were opposed to the proposal since it re-classfied their status as a minority”
Who says it "reclassified their status"? That at least needs to be proved with the posting of the thirteen amendments. Then again the article should also provide the Thirteen amendments to the reader so that the reader can make up his/her own conclusion. As it is right now it is Highly Controversial. and the factual accuracy of the statement is disputed.
The United Nations considers the TRNC to be legally invalid[2] in its resolutions, but in practice treats the North's elected leadership as bona fide negotiators for the Turkish Cypriot community.
Then, under the Pictures in the History section instead of "bona fide negotiator for the Turkish Cypriots" the reader sees "Founder President" and "President". The Security Council never has refered to "bona fide negotiator" Dektash and Talat as "Presidents". Please prove that factual inacuracy. Carefully read the above 2 lines. TRNC illegal but in practice .. in practice what? not illegal? or illegal TRNC and the Turkish Cypriot community has a negotiator in good faith... Controversial at the very least.
The whole article is in high contrast with the United Nations and the Security Council not to mention the European Court of Human Rights with multiple factual inaccuracies and a way to settle this is for the factual accuracy of this article be Disputed by the use of a tag.
If required i shall expand. I request that:
1The Factual Accuracy of this Article to be disputed by a tag.
2A tag showing that the article is Highly Controversial as agreed.
3. The name, the "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" (Turkish: Kuzey Kıbrıs Türk Cumhuriyeti) was self-declared. The UN considers TRNC as legally invalid and calls for the withdrawal. It possesses an administration and infrastructure, located in the north of the Republic of Cyprus. The de jure Republic of Cyprus can not exert its authority over its northern third, because of the Turkish forces. --Aristovoulos 18:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Factual Accuracy Disputed 

message: Does anyone else get the template error on the article page? Adam777 17:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thats a lot of information. I would think it would be better to put it on Wikisource and link to it from the main article. Adam777 19:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template Error 

message: Should these "Five Finger Mountain Legends" be on the main TRNC article, next to sections such as Politics and Economy? Seems oddly enough. --Húsönd 15:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Five Finger Mountain Legends

message: Any editors willing to give me a hand cleaning up the article? I suggest we work from top down. Aristovoulos 16:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: are you wanting to clean up the article so that is pro-Greek or so that it is neither pro-Greek nor pro-Turkish? Rhyddfrydol 22:01, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleaning up the article