Talk:Imbros

message: :Copied from Talk:Imbros and Tenedos. Some of the edit history of this article is also at Imbros and Tenedos. 20:02, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
The result of the debate was move. —Nightstallion (?) 08:52, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I've just reorganized the page into roughly chronological order, and while editing for style and grammar I also tried to tone down what seemed like a very pro-Greek/anti-Turkish POV.  However, I'm working without much knowledge here, and the page could benefit from someone who can give specifics (with citations!) for the ethnography of the islands during the 20th century, especially the Turkish policies that promoted the Greek exodus from the islands and exactly how they did or did not violate the terms of the Treaty of Lausanne. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 15:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ethnic cleansing was Greek government s idea. They wanted to replace Turk population in Greece with Greek pop in Turkish lands. 46.155.128.89 (talk) 04:59, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  March 1 2006 edit 

message: I've merged the content from The Greeks of Imbros and Tenedos per this AfD, as a new section titled "Greek population". I've wikified it slightly, but this section is still very POV, so I've tagged it with . Do with this content as you will. The original author has given citations for this content in Talk:The Greeks of Imbros and Tenedos. --Deathphoenix ʕ 14:54, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged content from [[The Greeks of Imbros and Tenedos]] per AfD 

message: Edit 15 March: Concerning the turkish intent; it was the turkish intent to get the Greeks to leave, as stated by many of the sources[] in particular: ...mais elle a de plus multiplié les efforts pour effacer tout caractère grec des deux îles... It is unlikely that the turkish governement "only" wanted to benifit their own ethnicity, as their own ethnicity hardly inhabitated the islands at all... Or in another sense that might be true, the turkish governement "only" wanted to benifit its own ethnicity on the islands by making room for it on the two islands in the first place- by removing the Greeks. But that does not change the intent.
It is unlikely that the Greek administration was particularly bad on Imbros and Tenedos, because they were nearly exclusively inhabitated by Greeks, thus there was not really a minority that could be mistreated.... In a sense the Greek administration would, in all likelyhood, have been considered a act of liberation by most of the islands inhabitants at the time! Globo 09:18, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article says majority on Imbros, bare majority on Tenedos. This is not "nearly exclusively". Septentrionalis 20:51, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit of 15 March 

message: Ιμβρος should have both an acute accent and a smooth breathing. This combination will not display on many computers, including mine, without the  template. I don't see any need for italic Greek letters here; they're already distinct, and usually lighter than, Roman lettering. Septentrionalis 14:06, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  No need to italicize text already not in Latin alphabet.  For other scripts it's not even an option to do so.  Satyadasa 22:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Polytonic

message: Evidently, even some Turkish sources not trying to propagate their POV use the terms "Imbros and Tenedos" in english, such as this Turkish Government website []
And, for the record, I will forever revert any edits which state anything as ridiculous as the greeks "renouncing their rights"!! I wonder if they were asked or if someone renounced it for them??!! The Turkish government had obligations under the Treaty of Lausanne, and that obligation was ultimately not fulfilled. There was, and is, no way out of that agreement. The greek "native non-moslems" don't lose their rights because Turkey becomes "secular". Guaranteed.
Globo 12:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let me get this straight. So, what you are implying is; all Turkish sources try to propagate their point of view except for a few, and one article written by a zoologist published on a zoology journal reveals the fact. Let's don't forget, because this article was uploaded to a user's personal page on a government web site, it is the Turkish Government website who uses the terms Imbros and Tenedos. This is  Evidently an evidence. Please.. DeliDumrul 14:29, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Turkish use of Imbros and Tenedos in english 

message: If this sort of nonsense on the names does not stop, I will request page protection; and there are other measures which can apply to patently disruptive editors. 
Asd for the modifications from pure reversion:
*Fine, Kertenkelebek can have his completely unsourced paragraph; the Greeks have several barely sourced ones. I may revise its tone.
*Turkish War of Independence is the name of the article. If you must, go fight there. Septentrionalis 16:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reversion

message: I notice that several, specifically Turkish, cats, have been moved from Gökçeada and Bozcaada, which redirects here. I really don't care, but some editors seemed happier with having :Category:Districts of Çanakkale show  Gökçeada and Bozcaada. If anyone, now or in future, wants to move them back, I won't object to that either; the effect is much the same. (If they are moved, they should be commented out here, not removed entirely.)  Septentrionalis 17:14, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You made some good points, but I think the categories should be in the actual article, not a redirect—in order to prevent confusion. However, as you said, I wouldn't object if they were added back either. —Khoikhoi 23:03, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, I think it is time that these articles be split... —Khoikhoi 23:04, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I fully agree; I've always found it strange they were treated in a single article, when it seemed clear to me that each should have his specific article.--Aldux 23:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My only reason for not splitting into Imbros and Tenedos was that so much of the content was common. Where should Imbros and Tenedos and Gökçeada and Bozcaada redirect to after the split? Imbros, I suppose.  Septentrionalis 15:52, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it could be a dab page. I know the content is common, but one must not forget that these are different islands. —Khoikhoi 17:16, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Fine, let's split. I've done a mechanical division, cutting out most of the references to each island. Septentrionalis 02:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Note on cats

message: Please keep the names as it is. This article is not correct place to discuss the adjective "Ecumenic". I you can see I try to put all place names and history as possible as neutrally. Please discuss "Ecumenic" name in the relevant pages as before.Please See Also link which is used here.
Regards
Mustafa Akalp(T) (C) 08:47, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You object to "Ecumenical Patriarch"? Why? Septentrionalis 16:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The title is 'Ecumenical Patriarch". This is the title he uses, the title he is known worldwide and the title under which he is accepted by nations, states, organisations and leaders, etc etc... If someone disputes the usage of this title, he should comment in the respective article's talk page. Thus, i am reverting... Hectorian 18:23, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing the names 

message: How we can add citations for "Madam Cafe" and "Barba". They are live and I know them, what kind of citations needed? please help.
Mustafa Akalp(T) (C) 08:58, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If they're not mentioned anywhere else, then they're not verifiable in Wikipedia's sense of the word, and we should not include them. This is partly because, while WP is not paper, we cannot include even one sentence on everybody on the planet; if no one has found them notable, we have no reason to. See the list of things Wikipedia is not; in addition, Wikipedia is not a neighborhood directory. Septentrionalis 16:49, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations  

message: Hectorian,
Till to today, official name was Patriarch  Bartholomew I of Constantinople and you change the name and why you move the linked articles.
Please contribute with some words/sentences/photos here instead of revert and move.
Regards.
Mustafa AkalpTC  18:24, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are the articles Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople and Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople. what i did today was updating Bartholomew's articles to be in accordance with the articles of his patriarchate and his title. I know why u dispute the usage of this title, but it is not something that can be pushed here... Upon next revert, i will present sources by the Patriarchate itself, the Vatican, Greece, EU, BBC, Reuters, Britannica, Columbia, USA, etc etc etc... So, please do not revert. Regards Hectorian 18:32, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Dear Hectorian. Two hours ago you moved Patriarch of Constantinople to Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople. No need nationalism. Did you ever know ,where Barthelomeo was born two days ago. I am trying to be neutral. I contribute many things  as well as the Barthelomeo's birth place,and I asked your oppinion(with khoikhoi and Tekleni) not any Turkish user. Please be reasonable. 
Much regards.
Mustafa AkalpTC  18:41, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move 

message: According to this map, there is a town on the island called Gökçeada. Is this the same as Çınarlı/Panaghia Balomeni? I noticed that it appears to be in the middle of the island on the map.
Also, has anyone ever read the book "Imbros" by Murat Yaykın? I found an interesting article while searching Google. —Khoikhoi 02:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Had the article been in english, i would be able to read it...:) Hectorian 02:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, but I think the people in the image are Greeks. Note here and here you will find instances of the words "Rum", "Rumlara", and "Rumların". :-) —Khoikhoi 02:24, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, i know... I can understand some scattered turkish words, but not the meaning... (so, i dare not come in conclussions...:)...) Hectorian 02:29, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes this book sounds interesting as it is a obviously Turkish source, but seems to also talk about the Greek inhabitants of the island and also the ethnography (etnografik! oh man I can speak Turkish!). Note that it is also titled Imbros, and Imroz is used in the article, with Gokceada being in brackets. It would be nice if a Turk could translate some of the blurb... Globo 07:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Gökçeada town" 

message: It would be nice if people who want to tag this article would look at our WP tags first and see what they say and mean, rather than leaving the article a mess. I have consolidated, I think, the meaningful complaints; but whoever did this should read WP:PEACOCK before using that tag again. 
Some of these complaints seem simply groundless; the source, for example, of the text of the Treaty of Lausanne is the Treaty of Lausanne, which is widely published. 
Many of the other statements complained of are sourced in the references listed, usually in the obvious one. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 04:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Tags

message: Shouldn't the title of the article be 'Imvros' since thats the way it is said? Vita does not make a 'b' sound. Grk1011 (talk) 23:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Imbros is the established form in English, just like Lesbos, Euboea, etc. Policy is to USEENGLISH. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well that's weird, how would how pronounce 'Euboea'? Youboya?!?!, that is not even close to 'Evia'. Grk1011 (talk) 23:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, "Youboya" is probably it. These are just the traditional pronunciations in English, obviously based on the traditional Latin transcriptions of the names. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Or the strict Erasmian reconstruction of ancient Greek pronunciation, even less like Evia, which would be  an anachronism for any time before Alexander; ancient goats said βαα. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 15:48, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Imbros? 

message: Gökçeada is the official name of the island and internationally recognized as such. For instance if someone wants to send a letter and writes "Imros" as the address, then the letter will be returned. (If there is a return address) This is also the case even when someone writes the official name Gökçeada along the obsolete name "Imros".
The same applies to Bozcaada the official name of the island and also internationally recognized as such. And not the obsolete name of "Tenedos".
:I suppose it may be useful to point out that we don't use WP:Official names; we use the names recognizable to English-speaking readers, because they are in common use in English. 
:To do otherwise would be to open the whole question of the justice of the official actions of the Turkish Republic, which we do not choose to do. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I am afraid, Tmhm, this cannot be done. The islands are internationally known by their old original names Imbros and Tenedos. If they are under Turkish or Greek rule does not matters. Even in Greece, there are Greek islands that are internationally known and called by their Italian names rather than their Greek names (see for example the english article of the Island of Kerkyra: Corfu instead of Kerkyra). This is the International English Wiki, Tmhm, not the Turkish one. --85.75.135.132 (talk) 19:23, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gökçeada is the official name of the island and internationally recognized as such. The same applies to Bozcaada the official name of the island and also internationally recognized as such. 

message: really? what else can be said? pure barbarism.
How could the world let that.
I understand this is not a forum but it is the first time i discover all that.
No wonder greeks hate turks...who wouldn t?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.242.60.126 (talk) 09:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The situation on Imbros only scratches the surface of what has happened. e.g. there are still 500,000 Turks in Greece, but there are only 3000 Greeks in Turkey... Doesn't take a genius to figure out why. But don't generalize that "Greeks hate Turks", because more often than not, they like them.  Anyway, I agree with you that this is not the place for such discussions.130.15.114.45 (talk) 18:52, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Great! You guys obviously have extensive insight and knowledge in the issue. Next time you can try and be a little less typical Greek then you already are. TheDarkLordSeth (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 01:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

text: You have been twice to Istanbul but still do not know how to write correctly its name (?) I am not going to say "shame on you" nor will reply to your soap opera; only a small detail FYI: The Turkish people (those of my generation) may still refer to the island with the old Turkish name of  "İmroz" but not "Imbros". (When I was in the primary school we learned about "İmroz ve Bozcaada" but as you may see in the article, the former island's name has changed since then.) No more comments on your words as this is not a forum... --E4024 (talk) 17:37, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

text: So I spelled the name of Istanbul wrong. its because on the keyboard n is next to m Sherlock Holmes, not cause I haven't been there. As for Imroz or Imbros that was not the point. But as you say, no more words. --94.66.23.199 (talk) 17:23, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shame on Turkey 

message: I don't understand this . The reference  clearly states on page 120 that ""During the 1960s and 1970s, a series of legal and administrative restrictions relating to minority educational and cultural rights, coupled with a program of expropriations forced the local Imbriot and Tenediot Greek Orthodox to abandon their islands....". This is state-sponsored persecution because a) it was a state policy, b) it was deliberately targeting the Greeks of Imbros so as to make them leave the island, therefore persecution. Second, the reference says unambiguously on page 120, sentence 3: "Indeed in the case of Imbros the population was entirely Greek". I honestly have no idea why the cn tags was added back. I agree that the article needs additional references, but that is a separate matter. Athenean (talk) 01:28, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You claimed During the 1960s and 1970s, a series of legal and administrative restrictions relating to minority educational and cultural rights, coupled with a program of expropriations forced the Imbriots...." =state-sponsored persecution. In short this is only your claim and explanation by your POV. When you transfer imformation, please do it faithfully to sources. Please read Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 01:40, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: My paraphrasing of the source is well within the bounds of WP:V and WP:PARAPHRASE and outside WP:OR. This was a state-sponsored (the islanders didn't do it to themselves, did they?) campaign to ethnically cleanse the island of its Greek community. Nothing new or surprising here, these policies are well-known. You are welcome to ask for a third opinion, but don't be surprised at the result. Athenean (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hmm. Unfortunately you couldn't understand. Alexis Alexandris didn't use the term persecution. We cannot use this term easily. For exampla, to explain the massacres committed by Greeek forces during the Greco-Turkish War (1919–1922), the term Yunan mezalimi or Yunan zulmü (Greek persecution) is used in the nationalism-oriented historiography. But we try to avoid the usage of this term, because Wikipedia is neutral encyclopedia. And even if you want to use the term state-sponsored, Alexis Alexandris didn't claim this. Was state sponsor ? Or persecutor (if they accept our usage of this term) ? If state was a sponsor, whose sponsor ? This term is not appropreate in accordence with article of Alexis Alexandris. Moreover Alexis Alexandris is a Greek. I don't want to think he propagated it. However, we must also use other more nuetral sources to prove the fact. So this source is not enough to prove this desputable issue. Now can you understand your POV pushing edits ? Let's ask other users who have more neutral point of views (I've already asked Constantine). Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 02:40, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You're welcome to ask whoever you want. Athenean (talk) 05:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  For example, we can use this article:
Çağdaş Kaplan, Sadık Topaloğlu, "Yok edilmeye çalışılan tarih: İmroz ve Tenedos" (The history attempted to be eliminated: İmroz ve Tenedos)", (originally DİHA) Evrensel, May 3, 2011.  
Maybe someone would say that this is Kurdish propaganda, it's not completely neutral (because this article was printed by the Dicle News Agency and provided to Yeni Özgür Politika , Özgür Gündem ). But I think they provided only facts about the works of Murat Yarkın precisely in this article.
Takabeg (talk) 05:00, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

text: Seriously? This  is not a reliable source. Please read WP:RS before proposing such sources. You suppose all those Greeks left of their own free will? Come on now. Athenean (talk) 05:24, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

text: , and I could easily find many more. Now stop wikilawyering by requiring that everything be sourced verbatim, and knock it off with the insults while you're at it. Athenean (talk) 07:20, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Apart from a mountain of bibliography someone can easily find the specific part word by word "repressive and discriminatory policies undertaken by ..." []. So I would say better avoid trolling expressions and stick to the relevant works which is plenty.Alexikoua (talk) 21:08, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  cn tags 

message: I don't think Gökçeada is common name of this island. But we must exclude historical usages of this name and other Imbros such as Imbros Gorge (or "Imbros Pass") in Crete, Imbros Gold Cup, Imbros (horse), Battle of Imbros (1717), Battle of Imbros (1918) etc., when we research with google books. Takabeg (talk) 05:03, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Other Imbros

message: It would of course be quite all right if anyone wanted to make a "List of Turkish regions through history", and it would make sense to include Greece in that list, provided it filled the criteria for inclusion. A list like that would obviously need inclusion criteria, just as the "List of Greek countries and regions" needs -- and has.
An alternative would be to argue that the "List of Greek countries and regions" should be deleted, but I can see no good reasons to do that. I do, however, think that the list might have a name reflecting the fact that it is a historical list, such as "List of Greek countries and regions through history", but that is another discussion.
As it stands now, the list exists, Tenedos/Bozcaada and Imbros/Gökçeada are on the list (and rightfully so, as they fulfil the inclusion criteria for the list), and it makes no sense to remove the intra-Wiki "See also"-reference. Regards! --79.160.40.10 (talk) 14:04, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I find the "you can have a ridiculous page too, so ours is ok" argument specious. The problem with the inclusion of Island A and Island B (I've adopted these names for the island to ease time.  A=I/G B=T/B) is that they don't meet the criteria specified.  Are they Empires?  No.  Are they Countries?  No.  Are they States?  No.  Are they Regions?  No (they appear nowhere in the Autonomous area page, which is the definition the page links to).  Are they a territory?  Maybe, if we go to the end of the list of definitions on Territory (administrative division), but if you look at the example of Chatham Islands provided there, you find that they are actually administratively called a Territory (that's important).  No reputable sources refer to them now or ever as Island A Region or Island B Territory.  Island A and Island B are not administratively "Territories" and so it is problematic.  So it fulfills none of the criteria at the top of the page.  Maybe, the list is just "places that Greeks were the majority" (change the title in this case), in which case New Smyrna Beach, Florida should be added, along with a number of other random places in the world that Greeks lived, including a thousand cities and towns in Turkey (I also nominate my old neighborhood in the Bronx where everyone was Greek).  It remains that Island A and Island B do not meet any of the inclusion criteria (a fact exemplified by the fact that they are the only places on the list that don't have flags in the modern section) for this list, they are just places (not empires, countries, states, regions, or territories) where Greeks were the majority and now they aren't.  Their inclusion on this list is problematic at best, and biased at worst. AbstractIllusions (talk) 17:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: "Objective" contributors who filled this article with "information" forgot to write the Ottoman era, which lasted about half a millenium.  If I make any reference to editor nationality, people rightly get disturbed. However, this does not explain their editing an article only from certain angles. I thought WP was not being made by everybody writing their own story.. Sorry to be this honest and always tell the truth. --E4024 (talk) 14:26, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greek region? 

message: I will remove the below part from the section Human Rights, as it is unsourced. Make this notification in case any editor wishes to add references from Reliable Sources to this part:
"The Greek émigrés from Turkey assert numerous violations of the religious, linguistic, and economic rights guaranteed as matters of international concern by the Treaty, including freedom of the Orthodox religion and the right to practice the professions. Leaders of the Greek community in Turkey "voluntarily waived" these rights in 1926; but the Treaty provides (Article 44) that these rights can only be modified by the consent of the majority of the Council of League of Nations. The émigrés assert that the signatures to the waivers were obtained by orders of the police, and that Avrilios Spatharis and Savvas Apostologlou, who refused to sign, were imprisoned. The Greek government appealed this action to the Council and was upheld, but Turkey has not complied." --E4024 (talk) 15:21, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have checked the original entry (back in 2007), and it turns out that it is sourced, but that later edits have disconnected the cite from the text. The source is the note that now is at the end of the "Human rights" section (number 17). And this is also given as source for all the entries that are marked with "citation needed" in the whole "Human rights" section. --79.160.40.10 (talk) 19:46, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsourced info - courtesy notification of imminent removal 

message: Is this article about an island? Does the reader learn enough about this island by reading this article? Or is the article used as a means to judge Turkish history from a selective angle? (This is why I added a "tone" tag.) The island belonged to the Ottoman Empire for centuries but the relevant sector is simply "empty". I request comments and contributions, especially from uninvolved, impartial WP editors. Thanks in advance. --E4024 (talk) 19:56, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Island article or Turk bashing? 

message: In the article it says it is an island of Turkey but the article's name is Imbros. That does not make sense. The article name must be Gökçeada. Do we use Turkish names of the Greek islands on their article names? Thanks.Aditdigo (talk) 10:15, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of the article 

message: Why are there two very weird contents on this page? The first one is in fully Greek, not English and so useless for all non-Greek speakers. 
And the second claim is based on a source which is not even valid anymore. It is not accessable. That's why I think it should be removed too.  DavidThomson1997 (talk) 00:14, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I advise you to read our policy of WP:RELIABLESOURCES where there is no mention that foreign-language sources are not allowed. If you have something against foreign-language sources you are welcome to take this up at the talkpage of the policy and try to change the policy. But discussing this issue here is not going to change the practice of using foreign-language sources on this wiki. As far as your second comment, it doesn't matter if a source is no longer available on the Internet. You can always use the Internet Archive to fix the link. But you should never remove sources even if they don't function. Finally, the movie My Grandfather's People has its own article on Wikipedia, so there is no reason to remove it from this article. In addition, have you tried to find more sources for this film using Google instead of complaining about the Vimeo source? I assume you know how to Google. Dr. K. 00:29, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

text: Not sure why you  removed this very helpful comment, left on your talkpage by an admin, explaining why policy allows the use of foreign-language reliable sources. If you think information is missing, you are welcome to expand the article, instead of removing sections in a wholesale fashion and for no good reason. Further, mentioning the ethnicity of other editors is contrary to our central policy of WP:AGF. Dr. K. 01:05, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culture?? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Imbros. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110721100156/http://www.yenicag.com.cy/haber.php?subaction=showfull&id=1184254556&archive=&start_from=&ucat=7& to http://www.yenicag.com.cy/haber.php?subaction=showfull&id=1184254556&archive=&start_from=&ucat=7&
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100218141404/http://www.gokceada.bel.tr:80/ to http://www.gokceada.bel.tr/
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120517021012/http://www.iussp.org/Brazil2001/s80/OtherPosters_P01_Bozbeyoglu.pdf to http://www.iussp.org/Brazil2001/s80/OtherPosters_P01_Bozbeyoglu.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121021183112/http://www.tudav.org:80/new/pdfs/2.EgeAdalari.pdf to http://www.tudav.org/new/pdfs/2.EgeAdalari.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100218141404/http://www.gokceada.bel.tr:80/ to http://www.gokceada.bel.tr/
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100426030421/http://www.iwasinturkey.com:80/wiki-guide/G%C3%B6k%C3%A7eada to http://www.iwasinturkey.com/wiki-guide/G%C3%B6k%C3%A7eada
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:26, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Imbros. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121002134443/http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc08/EDOC11629.pdf to http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc08/EDOC11629.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120219230918/http://www.sant.ox.ac.uk/esc/esc-lectures/babul.pdf to http://www.sant.ox.ac.uk/esc/esc-lectures/babul.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130523093354/http://vimeo.com/43207711 to http://vimeo.com/43207711
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:20, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Imbros. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304035848/http://deprem.ibb.gov.tr/tr/index.html to http://deprem.ibb.gov.tr/tr/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:51, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:23, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:17, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: A different page is needed for the town. The article refers to Gökçeada as the seat of the district of Gökçeada, but this article is about the island, and the whole island administratively belongs to the district, then is the administrative seat of the island and district the island itself? Aintabli (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems another editor had pointed out the existence of the town of Gökçeada on #"Gökçeada town", so I have moved on and created Gökçeada (town). Aintabli (talk) 18:30, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Island=/=town 

message: The boundaries of Gökçeada District are exactly same as those of the island. I believe the article for the district can be merged with this article. In the case of a merger, there is very little to add: the population as of 2022, list of villages and towns, the governor and mayor, and one or two templates. Aintabli (talk) 02:40, 13 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal