User talk:Alexyflemming/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Greek leader

Would you be able to confirm that T/c media (Bayrak) refer to the G/c leader simply as the "Greek leader"? [1] Ta 62.228.170.218 (talk) 20:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

I sourced in the relevant article.Alexyflemming (talk) 06:29, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Your addition to Tourism in Northern Cyprus has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 19:35, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

I looked at DNSSTUFF and found that the owner of "northcyprusguide.net" is "Riverside Holiday Village, Alsancak, Kyrenia, Northern Cyprus". I will send the Hotel administration a permission request for the flora.
Alexyflemming (talk) 20:14, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Tourism in Northern Cyprus, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

POV: Nope! Which part is POV (Point of View)? Did you ever see any sentence which I added without sourcing?

advert: Nope, "Tourism in X" articles, in its nature, has some sort of it. "T in NC" is not that excessive.

peacock: In what?

unreliable sources: Which source is unreliable? Did you ever read WP:RS?

Alexyflemming (talk) 20:08, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Are you asking me if I have read WP:RS? Yes I have, thank you, and that's why I detected your junk sources in the first place. But apparently you need a refresher course on WP:RS because you used the junk sources to add the following WP:SYNTH, WP:OR into the article Tourism in Northern Cyprus:

Northern Cyprus is described with many marvellous feelings all around the world such as "the last untouched paradise in Mediterranean Sea",<ref>[vimeo.com/105877921 Vimeo]</ref> "among most memorable destinations",<ref>[http://www.premier-travel.co.uk/our_people/cambridge_sidney_street/rebecca_allen Premier Travel]</ref> "lovely",<ref>[http://njpphotography.co.uk/photoplus-trip/ njpphotography]</ref> "unspoilt, un-commercialised, peaceful and beautiful",<ref>[http://www.tripadvisor.co.uk/ShowUserReviews-g2137421-d3942374-r177283079-Amazing_Seaviews_Penthouse-Buyukkonuk_Famagusta_District.html Trip Advisor]</ref> "a natural wonder and a tranquil undiscovered part of Cyprus",<ref>[http://www.ramblersholidays.co.uk/page/lesser-known-northern-cyprus ramblersholidays]</ref> "unspoilt paradise",<ref>[http://northcyprusunspoilt.co.uk/ northcyprusunspoilt]</ref> "paradise island" <ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yZtXO95YXA North Cyprus - Paradise Island]</ref> etc.

Please don't do this again. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:19, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

According to WP:RS, a reliable source can be biased. The matter is whether one can source it.Alexyflemming (talk) 17:22, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Hotel websites, Websites promoting travel to Northern Cyprus, Websites hosting apartments for rent, Vimeo videos, Youtube videos made by unknown users and comments by random customers on websites are not reliable sources and you cannot use them or quote them in articles. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 22:12, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Northern Cyprus edits

I will complement you on doing a great job updating and expanding many Northern Cyprus-related articles.

I oppose, however, to your sneaky removal of links to Cyprus / Island of Cyprus / Republic of Cyprus, usually replacing them with links to Northern Cyprus, sometimes even making double or triple links to NC to avoid linking to the island of / Republic of Cyprus. I also notice that all your newly created articles about places in NC do not have any mentions at all about RoC, not even the de jure/de facto distinction. That is definitely POV editing.

I oppose also to your consistent removal of any mention of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, replacing any mention with "the events of 1974" or your new favorite "the hostilities of 1974". These euphemisms do not give any information to the user of Wikipedia, they only create questions: "Which events?", "Which hostilities?". You have also been removing many sourced descriptions of the local effects of the 1974 ínvasion. These edits are definitely disruptive POV edits.

In your edit summaries you never mention the removals and changes you do to the article content, you only mention additions of mayors, population figures etc., which are obviously good additions. The disruptive edits I have mentioned above are never mentioned (which is why I used the word "sneaky"). To make it even worse, you are using false edit summaries. When you remove a category you do not like with an edit summary "syntax", it is not only disruptive, it is plain dishonest.

In a week's time I will again be able to edit regularly in Wikipedia, and I will then begin to revert your POV edits. In the meantime you could help, by reverting your worst POV edits. If not, the least you can do is to refrain from any more POV edits with dishonest edit summaries.

I really think that it would be possible for us to work together to create a neutral (WP:NPOV) presentation of places in NC, but that would require that you are willing to accept that your personal POV is not necessarily the only way to describe the world. Regards! --T*U (talk) 04:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

The answer

compliment:

Thank you for your congratulations.

sneaky removal:

Nope! The "de jure: Cyprus" links and "Famagusta District", "Kyrenia District", "Nicosia District" categories still remains in the articles! See once more carefully please!

"Northern Cyprus" authorities, administrations etc. are the current ones in effect. Even those who add "mayor-in-exile" for Famagusta article is not me, but some neutral point of viewed Greek Cypriots!

That said, I protected "de jure: Cyprus" link in all of the articles I added.

all your newly created articles about places in NC do not have any mentions at all about RoC, not even the de jure/de facto distinction.:

Nobody opposes you in adding "de jure: Cyprus" link in newly added articles of Northern Cyprus. You can phrase "missing information", but not "POV editing". You can add them in a week's time when you are idle!

removal of any mention of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, replacing any mention with "the events of 1974" or "the hostilities of 1974":

United Nations's standard way of currently handling the issue is from neutral point of view always:

United Nations' Official WebsiteUNFICYP Mandate: "...Following the hostilities of 1974, ..."

United Nations' Official WebsiteUNFICYP Background: "Since the events of 1974, ..."

The descriptions you qualify as "euphemisms" are used by United Nations.

The answers of "Which events?", "Which hostilities?":

Nobody opposes you to link the page you requested to answer these questions as long as you do not damage the neutral presentation of the article.

i.e. Using anybody's description of the events different than that neutral way of United Nations is POV.

Removing local descriptions..:

They mention forcefully expelling of Greek Cypriots to the south. However:

In November-December 1974, Denktas and Makarios agreed the voluntary moving of Greek Cypriots from some villages in the north to the south.

In August 1975, Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots agreed the "voluntary population exchange agreement" under the auspieces of United Nations and

many exhange were realized under the auspieces of United Nations.

Since this agreement was based on "voluntary moving the other side", thousands of people did not want to change their side, and remained where they are. For example,

Orthodox Greek Cypriots in Rizokarpaso, Agios Andronikos, Cyprus and Agia Triada, Cyprus and Catholic Maronite Cypriots in Asomatos, Karpasia, town and Kormakitis agreed to live under Turkish Cypriot administration and stayed in the north and Turkish Cypriots in Limassol agreed to live under Greek Cypriot administration and stayed in the south of the Cyprus island.

Those people and their descedents still live in 2014 in the places they chose in 1975! Hence, "forcefully eviction" or "depopulation" phrases are clearly POV. For the latter, the towns and villages, never depopulated. There were people in 1974 there and there were people in 1975 there as well.

The change in the ethnicity of the living beings were caused by the "voluntary population exchange agreement".

mayors, population figures etc., which are obviously good additions:

Even these ones are removed by some vandalists constantly, as happened many times in this articles. I hope there are enough people with common sense to protect them.

Though thousands of times I proved with links that the census in the north in 2011 was under the auspieces of United Nations and its observers, there are many users who vandalistically remove them.

When you remove a category you do not like with an edit summary "syntax", it is not only disruptive, it is plain dishonest.:

What if a category is completely dishonest in itself?!! Read above mentionings with "forcefully expelled, depopulated" etc.

The cities, towns, villages were never depopulated. There were always people in 1974, in 1975, in 1976, ..., in 2014 at these places. Any change caused by voluntary changing the sides.

If all of the Greek Cypriots in Kyrenia had wanted to stay in Kyrenia, they would have been living in Kyrenia now just as the Greek Cypriots in Rizokarpaso, Agios Andronikos, Cyprus and Agia Triada, Cyprus and Catholic Maronite Cypriots in Asomatos, Karpasia, town and Kormakitis !

I will then begin to revert your POV edits:

Do not be prejuidiced. Sit down and think thoroughly and let you analyze the facts first carefully. Read the sources of all three sides: those of Greek Cypriots, Turkish Cypriots, the other third party ones like that of United Nations (especially UNFICYP).

Alexyflemming (talk) 08:09, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Bias: I did notice that you did keep the de jure/de facto distinction in the infobox. I also noticed that you deliberately did not include it in the infobox of the articles you created. Double standards or just hoping no-one would see it? My main objection is, however, that you virtually have (sneakily) removed all links to Cyprus in the main text of a long range of articles, usually replacing them with more links to Northern Cyprus.

Euphemisms: It is of course acceptable and even recommendable to vary the language by referring to "the hostilities" or "the events" provided that it is clear what those expressions refer to, for example after a mention of the 1974 invasion (with a link to the "Turkish invasion" article). But if you remove the first mention and not even link to anything, the expressions become euphemisms that does not give the reader any information.

Dishonesty: What you mean about the category you removed, is neither here nor there. Using a false edit summary is not acceptable under any circumstances. --T*U (talk) 18:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Further answer

1. T*U: "Bias: I did notice that you did keep the de jure/de facto distinction in the infobox."
AF: I hope for the next time you accuse me with "less dishonesty" :)

2. T*U: "I also noticed that you deliberately did not include it in the infobox of the articles you created. Double standards or just hoping no-one would see it?"
AF: As for the best presentation (to me), the appearance of "de jure and de facto expressions" in all the articles that is somehow related with Northern Cyprus is not normal. When a user wants to know something about "Northern Cyprus" it is normal for his/him to see that info there. This is presentation side of this issue.

There is also a "legal" part of this issue. According to ECtHR, all of the actions of Northern Cyprus' authorities may be regarded legal. Hence, establishing a municipality in Northern Cyprus as an administrative act is also legal. See below. Hence, writing "de facto" for a "legal entity" (a municipality in this handling) of Northern Cyprus is very absurd. That "de facto, de jure" expressions must be restricted to "Northern Cyprus" as a country-handling. Yeni Boğaziçi municipality of Northern Cyprus became a member of International Cittaslow Organization. Yeni Boğaziçi municipality has a legal personality. According to Cittaslow regulations, any candidate member of Rep. of Cyprus must apply first to Yeni Boğaziçi municipality of Northern Cyprus. Now, which one is legal, which one is illegal? Or both? Do you see what I mean...Now, the proof of my above statement:

• Not only the laws of "Immovable Property Commission of Northern Cyprus (and its related laws)" but also all laws of Northern Cyprus without any exception are recognized at European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR): http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/Pages/search.aspx#{"fulltext":["Pavlides"],"documentcollectionid2":["CASELAW"],"itemid":["001-122907"]} ECtHR Decision 02.07.2013, App. nos. 9130/09 and 9143/09; Pavlides v. Turkey; Georgakis v. Turkey. ECtHR: "...notwithstanding the lack of international recognition of the regime in the northern area, a de facto recognition of its acts may be rendered necessary for practical purposes. Thus, THE ADOPTION BY THE AUTHORITIES OF THE "TRNC" OF CIVIL, ADMINISTRATIVE OR CRIMINAL LAW MEASURES, AND THEIR APPLICATION OR ENFORCEMENT WITHIN THAT TERRITORY, may be regarded as HAVING A LEGAL BASIS in domestic law for the purposes of the Convention".
  Note: In the related above case, the application of Greek Cypriots was found to be "INADMISSABLE" by ECtHR and IMMEDIATELY REJECTED by ECtHR! That is to say, the applicant Greek Cypriots were expelled just at the beginning of the process. Case was never handled by the ECtHR!
  
• Anthony Cullen and StevenWheatley (2013): "The Human Rights of Individuals in De Facto Regimes under the European Convention on Human Rights"

Human Rights Law Review 13:4

p. 708: ECtHR did follow the position in international law that not all acts of a de facto government are to be regarded as being without legal validity.

p. 709: The Grand Chamber of ECtHR accepted that the judicial system in the TRNC could be considered to be established by law.

p. 710: The ECtHR has continued to recognise the utility of the government system established under the TRNC Constitution.

3. T*U: "more links to Northern Cyprus":
AF: It is highly normal that the Turkish Cypriots governors, mayors, peoples who are actively operating these villages for 40 years (since 1974) and legally administrating (see above) it for 30 years (since 1983) and performing all the activities on the settlements via creating streets, buildings, may appear more in those article pages.
Before all, the Greek Cypriots of these settlements (including mayors-in-exile) could not come to these settlements even as a tourist till 2003!
And since 2003, these Greek Cypriots can come only as a tourist there. As is routine in every handling and covering in a normal encyclopedia, something's "X-in-exile" appears less than X-in-active, "X-in-reality".
We are in 2014. Will you still object to "more links to Northern Cyprus" in 2114 as well? If not, when will your objections stop?
The life did not stop and got frozen in these places. World continued rotating and still rotates.
Law existed via time:
- European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rejected Tasos and Marianna' desire to return to the North and settle in the house where they left in 1974 (Tasos Asproftas: [Application no. 16079/90] ve Marianna Petrakidou [Application no. 16081/90]). "...The place from where Greek Cypriots migrated is no longer their home since they lived almost their life elsewhere and they don’t have concrete and persisting links with the property concerned...”
- European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decided Northern Cypriot authoties can expropriate Greek Cypriots' properties with 1974 values (namely 1/10 of their 2014 values)
Antonakis Solomonides (Application no. 16161/90), Loizou (Application no. 16682/90)
- European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) decided that all of the Greek Cypriots without any exception (including #1 political authority president of Rep. of Cyprus Anastasiadis, #1 religious authority priest Chrisostomos) must apply Northern Cypriot authorities in things related with it before taking their cases to ECtHR.
(Chrysostomos II [Application no. 66611/09])

I will not include more decision of ECtHR since the message is clear.

4. T*U: "Euphemisms: It is of course acceptable and even recommendable to vary the language by referring to "the hostilities" or "the events""
AF: After saying this, what else you say more are all POV, non-neutrality; all "...,but ", "...., provided that" expressions somehow denotes non-digestions.

5. T*U: "provided that it is clear what those expressions refer to, for example after a mention of the 1974 invasion (with a link to the "Turkish invasion" article)."
AF: Nobody opposes you to link the expressions ("the hostilities","the events") to wiki-pages you requested to give the info you desire to the reader. But, in the articles, if you add "invasion", you damage the neutral presentation of the article.
Did you ever see United Nations linking "the hostilities" or "the events" to any of the "invasion" pages? Obviously no!
Cyprus issue is not new, more than 50 years old. Also, in the "hostilities OF 1974", "the events OF 1974", "OF 1974" part clearly means many things: "15july coup, 20-22 july 14-16August war". That said,
There is considerable amount of objections to depict the events of 1974 as "invasion" in Wikipedia. In the past, throughout years, it is again and again objected by various wiki users!
That said, any move that is further than the usage: [[Turkish invasion of Cyprus|the hostilities of 1974]] and [[Turkish invasion of Cyprus|the events of 1974]] is POV and non-neutral bombardment. In fact, even this sending inherits some sort bias in itself.

To your info: Armenians mentioned, written, showed "billions of times" "Armenian Genocide".

European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) (17.12.2013, Perinçek v. Switzerland, application no. 27510/08): "1915 events cannot be qualified as genocide", and punished Switzerland!

Turkey said to Armenia: "OK! Let you put your 100 most important proof for "genocide", let me put my 100 most important proof for "1915 events", and let neutral historians decide"
Armenia rejected! Turkey said to Armenia "OK! Let us open all our archieves to all researchers, and let them search" Armenia rejected. After this offer, Turkey opened all its archives to researchers unilaterally. Armenia's archives are still closed in 2014!
What I mean is that "saying invasion billions of times" does not make it invasion just in the same way "saying genocide billions of times" did not make it genocide! Even that approach weakens your cause (whatever it is) in the eyes of people!
This is similar to: erecting status of a person everywhere in a country causes antipathy of people about that person!

6. "Dishonesty: What you mean about the category you removed, is neither here nor there. Using a false edit summary is not acceptable under any circumstances."
AF: [[Category:Greek_Cypriot_villages_depopulated_during_the_1974_Turkish_invasion_of_Cyprus|This]] is not a category. This is the definition of propaganda and vandalism (as I explained above). Nothing else. That said, this "category" itself is not included in the main body of the related articles. It appears as the bottommost link. Hence, since it is basically outside of the content, it is somehow related with the syntax side. Hence, one way of expressing it in your way seems plausible, there is also another side of the same medallion.Alexyflemming (talk) 18:30, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Bias: I repeat: "that you virtually have (sneakily) removed all links to Cyprus in the main text of a long range of articles".

Euphemisms: I repeat: "provided that it is clear what those expressions refer to".

Dishonesty: I repeat: "false edit summary is not acceptable under any circumstances". "Hence, since it is basically outside of the content, it is somehow related with the syntax side." Rubbish! And FYI: There are procedures for suggesting deletion of categories.--T*U (talk) 19:50, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

1. Bias: "forcefully expel" and "depopulate" are completely lies. Disproven with sources from United Nations official website December.1974, August.1975

2. Further than [[Turkish invasion of Cyprus|the hostilities of 1974]] and [[Turkish invasion of Cyprus|the events of 1974]] is POV and non-neutral bombardment; and eventually will be taken to Wikipedia Administrators Board. That way, perhaps, I will highlight the move from "Turkish invasion of Cyprus" to "1974 Cyprus war" that resulted in "no consensus" a little while ago; to a new more neutral stage. Till the consensus is formed, you can use that non-neutral and biased sending as well.

3. " a category" for which you mention "the process of deletion of categories". Why do you perform/offer it so by yourself? Are the protecting the category that is "full propoganda, full vandalism, full lie, full hate" honorous? "syntax" is for "Wikipedia rules" as well!Alexyflemming (talk) 20:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Topics relating to Northern Cyprus are covered by WP:ARBMAC

Please read this information carefully :

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding the Balkans, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:09, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I did not make any edit to Balkans! The links (this and this) you give do not include anything about me. I am Alexy Flemming, not Alex. Read the things carefully first, please!Alexyflemming (talk) 17:29, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

The second thing is that the editing style in the articles of Northern Cyprus is also used by many Wiki users before me!Alexyflemming (talk) 17:32, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't know who is "Alex" because my warning is for you. Any issue related to Greece or Turkey is covered under ARBMAC. Please see a similar warning about Northern Cyprus by AE admin EdJohnston. Northern Cyprus is covered under ARBMAC. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 21:25, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I hope you will obey your own advice. Previously you mention "island nation of Cyprus" and "hiding the truth behind 1974". I remembered you the laughing of Karpasian donkeys who say "we are the only Cypriot in the island" and with "the 15-july coup and precedings". I hope this time your stance will not be in the way you behaved earlier.Alexyflemming (talk) 12:46, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

If your nonsense reply made any sense, grammatically or otherwise I could reply to it. But it doesn't. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 17:34, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Changes to Template:Municipalities of Northern Cyprus

All the settlements you've added to the template are not municipalities. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 23:12, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

They all have an administrative unit. The administor of that unit changes according to the size of the settlements. For example, "Mukhtar" if it is a small village; "Bucak/Belde administrator" if it is a "Bucak/Belde"; Mayor if it is among 5 cities. Also, please choose a username. Do not use IPs, since that IP may possibly comment in the name of you in future.Alexyflemming (talk) 08:20, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Right, but only belediye are municipalities. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 09:48, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

See the infoboxes of the settlements, for example, Ayios_Theodhoros. There is an entry "Government" in the infoboxes. What type of administrative units has is stated there. Hence, if you know the types of each settlements, you can edit them there. ~I may edit also when I am enough idle.Alexyflemming (talk) 10:58, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand what's that got to do with the navbox. If you're not gonna remove all the places you've added to it, then should we at least call it 'Settlements in Northern Cyprus' or something? 31.153.94.214 (talk) 12:10, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

The elections are held as "Belediye Seçimleri" (Municipality Elections). This is valid even though some of them are villages. Interpret "municipality" in broad sense as it is done in the definition of "municipality in Wikipwedia":

• A municipality is usually an urban administrative division having corporate status and usually powers of self-government or jurisdiction. The term municipality is also used to mean the governing body of a municipality.[1] A municipality is a general-purpose administrative subdivision, as opposed to a special-purpose district. The term is derived from French "municipalité" and Latin "municipalis".[2]

• The English word "Municipality" derives from the Latin social contract "municipium", meaning duty holders, referring to the Latin communities that supplied Rome with troops in exchange for their own incorporation into the Roman state (granting Roman citizenship to the inhabitants) while permitting the communities to retain their own local governments (a limited autonomy).

• A municipality can be any political jurisdiction from a sovereign state, such as the Principality of Monaco, or a small village, such as West Hampton Dunes, New York.
  
• Please read Wikipedia thoroughly. Also, you are "removing referenced info" from Kythera's page. This is prohibited in Wikipedia. There are many pages with "Trivia" Sub-heading.
  

Alexyflemming (talk) 13:10, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Municipalities are not coterminous with any kind of settlement. Though Turkish Cypriot municipalities may carry the name of the largest settlement within their boundaries, municipality and settlement are not one and the same. (However, to avoid duplication, we've only got one article for both.) Various villages, though they belong to municipalities, are not them, and so, they've got no place on the navbox. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 14:11, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Alternatively, what we could do is, keep all of them, but use nested lists to denote the municipality, e.g.

• Vadili
  • Vatili (Vadili)
  • Strongylos (Turunçlu)

Regardless, the way the navbox is now is no good. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 14:54, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

• Your offer (using nesting to show hierarchy among settlements) seems to be plausible. But, that has also some disadvantages as well:
  

1. Municipalities have the same name with the most significant village in that area. This causes the repeatition in vain (as is Vadili in your example)

2. The template inflates and gets bigger and bigger which is not good since there are also other templates in these pages which are shadowed in that case. If I can found a better way to show hierarchy without inflating the template, be sure that I 'll definetely apply it.

Alexyflemming (talk) 15:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Then maybe keep places that belong to the same municipality grouped and bold the settlement the municipality's named after? 31.153.94.214 (talk) 15:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

You are perfect! This did not come to my mind. I will apply your advice by looking the hierarchy in 2011 Census of North Cyprus. Thanks a lot once more.Alexyflemming (talk) 16:26, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I've now discovered you created district templates, that this one wholly duplicates. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 10:53, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

This is standard applications in Cyprus related articles: See for example: LapithosAlexyflemming (talk) 11:09, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

And do you see nothing wrong with that? My suggestion would be to do away with the municipality templates. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 11:12, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

The Districts are already included in the municipality templates. See Lapithos. Therefore, a reasonable and mindful brain should throw Districts template totally (Kyrenia District, Girne District). The problem is: not all villages in District templates are proceeded in the respective parts of municipalities template. All in all, "one should reach any village from any village via navigation". This is the reason why Municipality templates must be protected whereas District ones should be removed.Alexyflemming (talk) 11:48, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I've trouble understanding what you're saying. I advocate getting rid of the municipalities navbox 'cause we don't really have any articles on them. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 14:28, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Northern Cyprus, you may be blocked from editing. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 14:40, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Your addition to Northern Cyprus has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. You copied a sentence from http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1218&context=curej . In addition to your WP:SYNTHESIS, this is a blatant copyright violation and WP:PLAGIARISM. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 14:43, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Your addition to Northern Cyprus has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please do not add material from advertising sections. The so-called "Advocacy Department" from the Washington times is an advertising insert by the TRNC in the newspaper. Also you plagiarised from it: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/30/higher-education-turkish-republic-northern-cyprus/?page=2 Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 15:02, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

0. You seem to be silent upon your "island nation of Cyprus" and "hiding behind 1974 events" in which you "equalized Turkish Cypriots and Greek Cypriots who are totally different for 500 years" and "ignored 15 july coup of Greek Cypriot terrorists and declaration of Hellenic Republic of Cyprus and Makarios's "Cyprus was invaded by Greece" cry". These are proofs of your total biasedness in Cyprus issue in the past discussions in Wikipedia.

1. Blatant SP:SYNTHESIS and copyvio from http://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1218&context=curej.

Here, all the 3 info are sourced. Why do you revert to the previous case? The links actually proves the info in article is blatantly wrong! How can a country having 18.000 international university students (other than those 34.000 from Turkey) become dependent on Turkey? When USA attracted so many international university students, then does this make you state "USA is dependent on other countries?!!" 40% of GDP of Northern Cyprus is from education, only 50% of this 40% is from Turkey. "Turkey is the closest country to Northern Cyprus (after Cyprus), and hence it is very normal that trade relations are very big for these countries". The goods of France are most purchased by Germans. Does this make you state "France is dependent to Germany"?

'2. You are adding 100% completely lie and wrong sources again and again. Why? For example, Gideon Boas(1 January 2012): "Northern Cyprus...is entirely dependent on Turkey for economic, political and military support." Colud you please ask ,"Dr" K, to Gideon how a country that takes more international (other than Turkey) university students than lots of the European countries can be "entirely" dependent on Turkey? Do not you get bothered to put us to a position of stupid and brainless?

To your info, dear Dr. K: Armenians mentioned, written, showed "billions of times" "Armenian Genocide".

European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) (17.12.2013, Perinçek v. Switzerland, application no. 27510/08): "1915 events cannot be qualified as genocide", and punished Switzerland!

That is to say, dear Dr. K.,You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time but you cannot fool all the people all the time. But, feel free. One can bury his head in the sand like an ostrich till the hunter (truth) faces him.

3. Why do you revert to the previous case? The links actually proves the info in article is blatantly wrong! If you object from plagiarism approach, then you can at least delete my addition while deleting also the wrong, outdated and obsolete parts as well!

4. Dr.K. :"So-called "Advocacy Department" from the Washington times is advertising insert by TRNC in the newspaper."

Do not you see the phrase "By The Washington Times Advocacy Department - - Tuesday, September 30, 2014" here?

How can you insult a department of Washington Times as "so called"?

Did you ever see any proof that page was ad of Northern Cyprus? From where do you derive this?

"So called, so called,..." Continue...

Your "so called" Northern Cyprus is today racing in Solar Race Car Championship in South Africa.

Your "so called" Northern Cyprus participated in 2014 Robot Football Championship in Brasil in 2014.. Also, here.

Your "so called" Northern Cyprus organized 2014 European Billiard Championship.

Your "so called" Northern Cyprus will organize 2014 World Footballtennis Championship...

You love the word "so called" dear Dr.K. Please, bring your non-so-called passport with you when passing to the north since "so called" officials will check it, otherwise you cannot enter to the north.

5. Also, "source and reference bombardment" and "Wikipedia policy bombardment" when your reasonings exhausted and disproven just show your recent character. Continue...

Alexyflemming (talk) 17:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User_talk:Alexyflemming. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Don't attack other editors as you did in this diff. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 19:04, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

1. Didn't you really see the phrase "Advocacy Department" in Washington Times? You are naming lots of things of Northern Cyprus as "so called". Now, you stated a part of Washington Times (of USA) as "so called"?

2. Do you really believe "entirely dependent on Turkey" lies?

Alexyflemming (talk) 19:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

1. The so-called "Advocacy Department" of the Washington Times is the advertising section of the newspaper. And you plagiarised the advertising insert about the universities in Northern Cyprus in that newspaper.

2. See WP:TRUTH. There are 6 extremely reliable sources supporting the dependence on Turkey.

3. You'd better stop your plagiarism, advertising, synthesis, original research and personal attacks. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 19:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

1. Nope, if tomorrow Rep. of Cyprus make an advertisement stating "North Cyprus univs are not recognized and accepted all over the world" then will the same Washington Times put it in its website?

Obviously, no! People cannot publish every ad they want! The "so-calledness" of "Advocacy Department" is your entitling, your rejection, not the anybody else! I guess it is soon that you will mention "so-called world" phrases.

2. I asked you a very simple question: Do you really believe "entirely dependent on Turkey" lies? Yes or No, that simple! (Hint: 18,000 international university students from 114 countries)

3. If you see one proof as plagiarism, then you have an counter proof to an already outdated and obsolete part in the article. Then, in that case while you delete my addition, why are you protecting insistingly the outdated and obsolete part? Your objection is not to the plagiarism (if any) essentially, your objection is to the "essence" of the informations given! Even tough I rephrase the informations given, you will again remove them!

Alexyflemming (talk) 19:41, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

I won't bother replying to the nonsense of 1 and 2. I have already replied to them above anyway. But I will reply to no. 3.

3. Did you see now that the fact of the dependence is supported by eight references, three of which are from 2012, two from 2013 and one from 2014, and are updated and no longer "obsolete" as you falsely claim? Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 19:51, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

"TWT's Advocacy Department provides multiple platforms to reach your target and help brand awareness/message outreach to Capitol Hill and beyond." [2] Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 21:15, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

@Tiptoethrutheminefield: Thank you for the link. It makes clear what was obviously an advertising insert. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 21:35, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

It seems even worse than advertising - and worse than "advertorials", they seem to be advertising themselves as an advocacy/lobbying group for hire. Nothing from such a source is usable as a neutral source. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 22:33, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you again for your incisive comments Tiptoethrutheminefield. I wasn't aware of these details. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 23:23, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

1. Wikipedia: TRUTH. I won't bother replying to the nonsense of 1 and 2.

WP:TRUTH: "verifiability, not truth".

Did you ever see me using sources whose truthness I do not believe!!!

I also supplied sources who are "verifiable, but truth as well!".

2. the fact of the dependence via 8 references, 3 from 2012, 2 from 2013, 1 from 2014, and are updated and no longer "obsolete"

Isomorphic to "I have more sources than you, my sources defeats yours!". But, Wikipedia is neither head count, nor source count!. You are basing your claims to the sources, truthness of which even you are not believing! Also, how can a country (whose 40% of GDP is from education) be "entirely dependent on Turkey" if it takes 18.000 international university students (other than 34.000 of that of Turkey) from 114 countries? Your up-to-date reliable sources (Gideon Boas, 1 January 2012) says "entirely dependent"! Isn't this approach/interpretation equivalent to putting the all Wiki users to a position of stupid and totally brainless? Northern Cyprus has also more than 1 million tourists from UK, Russia, Iran, etc. per year besides that 40% of GDP from education!

3. See the FIRST DATA in "TWT's Advocacy Department provides multiple platforms to reach your target and help brand awareness/message outreach to Capitol Hill and beyond.":

Affiliation: Nonpartisan. That is to say, neutral and objective. Tomorrow, if Rep. of Cyprus offer 2 times money to Washington Times (if it ever taken from NC) that supports Rep. of Cyprus view, then will the same Washington Times publish it?

Is Washington Times an honorless Newspaper that does whatever one wishes if he sends money?

4. Nothing from such a source is usable as a neutral source.

The affiliation of that advocacy group is nonpartisan!

5. Northern Cyprus has its own Dollar Billioners in the country that founded many hospitals, universities, etc... in the Northern Cyprus. See for example, Suat Gunsel with his 1.2 Billion wealth!

Alexyflemming (talk) 07:56, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I do not quite understand how the number of foreign students disproves that NC is "entirely dependent for economic, political and military support". However, the world "entirely" is not even cited in the article text. The lead says "heavily dependent", which is what most of the sources use. Other choices could be "almost completely dependent" or "hugely dependent". In order to state anything else in the lead, you would have to come up with reliable sources stating that it is not "heavily dependent". Trying to prove your "truth" by original reseach and/or syntehsis is just not how things are done in Wikipedia. It is good advice to read the guidelines of Wikipedia carefully and be sure to understand them. You could start with WP:TRUTH, as the doctor ordered, but there are many more that are useful to all of us. --T*U (talk) 11:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

1. I do not quite understand how the number of foreign students disproves that NC is "entirely dependent for economic, political and military support"

Education sector is 40% of GDP of Northern Cyprus. 50% of this 40% does not come from Turkey; it comes from students including international students (other than Turkey!). This is economic part.

For the political part, institutions of Northern Cyprus are members of various international organizations as a different country (than Turkey!). It needed no Turkey's help for most of these memberships. It has its own political tools, it has its own economic tools (Suat Gunsel of Northern Cyprus is among nearly 1000 richest person in the world according to some sources.).

Suat Gunsel is the owner of Northern Cyprus' largest educational institution, the Yakindogu (Near East) University. He also invests in hospitals, banks, hotels, fuel oil, plastics and cable companies. In 2013 he opened his second university, Girne University, specializing in seafaring, in the northern Cyprus seaside city of Girne. The main sources of his wealth are the real estate he owns on the Turkish side of northern Cyprus and in Turkey.

2. the word "entirely" is not even cited in the article text. The lead says "heavily dependent", which is what most of the sources use.

To use "heavily dependent, almost completely dependent, hugely dependent", one must at least witness "51% of GDP of Northern Cyprus" from Turkey. However, 40% of GDP of Northern Cyprus from Higher Education sector that Northern Cyprus does not depend on Turkey (18,000 int'l univ studs from 114 countries!). Also, very big percent of GDP of Northern Cyprus is comes from tourism via UK, Germanian, Iranian, Russian, etc. tourists besides Turkey. Hence, "education+tourism" is clearly more than 50% of GDP of Northern Cyprus.

Also, there is an other side of the medallion as well. The biggest export and import partner of France is Germany. The distance between the countries, level of culture, easyness of doing business etc. Can one say "France is dependent on Germany"? Huh, trade follows the same way of mind and intelligent. In order to prevent you from stating "NC is dependent on Turkey", should NC trade with Greece, Austria, etc. instead of 75 km ahead Turkey?

3. In order to state anything else in the lead, you would have to come up with reliable sources stating that it is not "heavily dependent".

Brian Zachary Mund (01.12.2013, University of Pennsylvania): "Breakaway States: Understanding When The International Community Recognizes The Legitimacy of Separatist States"

"...TRNC has firmly established itself as an independent actor in the international community..."

4. "...start with WP:TRUTH, as the doctor ordered..."

The "Doctor" cannot "order" anything to a Wiki user, he can at most "advice" on the provision of obeying those advises himself at first glance. That said, as I said to Dr., when his all reasonings exhaust, he frequently uses WP policy tag bombardments.

Alexyflemming (talk) 12:30, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

I am not a doctor, but I could recommend WP:BLUDGEON. --T*U (talk) 13:18, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Armenians understood the meaning of WP:BLUDGEON very well with ECtHR's 2013 decision. I hope it will not be that difficult for GCs to understand it as well.Alexyflemming (talk) 13:29, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Infobox for places in Northern Cyprus

I am planning to edit some of the articles about places in Northern Cyprus. Studying the infobox structure, I see that there is a problem with the "District" parameter. It used to link to "Districts of Cyprus", which was not a neutral linking, since there were two different districts mentioned (de jure / de facto). After your edits many of them now link instead to "Districts of Northern Cyprus", but that is also not neutral, for the same reason. The solution that has been used for some articles, is to drop the linking altogether. That is neutral enough, but you then loose the link to both of the two overview articles. One could, of course, link them both in the main text, but that would in many cases be cumbersome, and the infobox is in any case a good place for such links. It would be fine if we could agree on a formula before any of us start editing new articles. I have a suggestion that might solve the problem.

Since the links to "de jure" and "de facto" are already in the "Country" entry, it is not necessary to have the same links in the "District" entry. Those who wonder what these terms stand for, will already have had the chance to look it up. Then we can make two separate entries for "District de jure" and "District de facto" (as some articles have had before). The two entries on "Country" will make it clear for the reader what is what and why the distinction is made. I have made a tentative edit to Ayios Elias, Cyprus to show how it would look. What do you think? --T*U (talk) 16:06, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

1. Your 1st offer is quite reasonable: de jure/de facto must appear only in the country part.

2. Your 2nd offer ("District de jure, District de facto"), I disagree. Here is my "legal" reasonings:

According to ECtHR, all of the actions (administrative, civil, criminal etc.) of Northern Cyprus' authorities may be regarded as legal. So, NC established a District, then that District may be regarded legal. NC established "Immovable Property Commission (IPC)", then that IPC may be regarded as legal (I'll explain this below little further as well). Notice, without any exception, all of the Greek Cypriots must first apply Northern Cyprus authorities for the things in NC and exhaust all domestic (i.e. Northern Cypriot) remedies in order to take their cases to ECtHR; otherwise, without any exception, all of them are rejected as is proven in no.1 religious authority (Chrisostomos) was rejected.

The "de facto, de jure" expressions" is restricted to "Northern Cyprus" as a country-handling and in the base of United Nations (UN). As is known, there are myriad, several and countless international (sportive, educational, etc.) organizations that completely isolate themselves from politics intentionally. For these international organizations, the administrative units, municipalities, clubs,...etc. of Northern Cyprus are all legal. That is to say, "de factoness/de jureness" is in general restricted to UN-base as a country-handling.

For example: Yeni Boğaziçi municipality of Northern Cyprus became a member of International Cittaslow Organization as an administrative unit of Northern Cyprus. Yeni Boğaziçi municipality has a legal personality. That membership is well "de jure" on the basis of Cittaslow. (To your information: According to Cittaslow regulations, any candidate member of Rep. of Cyprus must apply first to Yeni Boğaziçi municipality of Northern Cyprus! (the closest Cittaslow member!)).

For example, "The Association of North Cyprus Biologists (Bio-Der)" is a member of European Countries Biologists Association (ECBA) as an educational organization of NC. Bio-der has a legal personality on the basis of ECBA.

For example, Billiard Federation of Northern Cyprus (BFNC) is a member of European Pocket Billiard Federation (EPBF) as a sportive unit of Northern Cyprus. Cyprus Pocket Billiard Federation (CPBF) is a member of EPBF as a sportive unit of Cyprus. Cyprus and Northern Cyprus matched in 2010. 2014 European Billiard Championship was organized in NC. BFNC has a legal personality. De jure! There are many Northern Cypriot (Turkish Cypriot) persons in the administrative boards of Int'l organization. Even there are int'l sports bodies whose headquarters are in NC!

In 259 million aid of EU to NC, there are many contracts were signed between the municipalities of NC and EU. And, in case of disagreements in this contracts, EU and municipalities of NC first applied to the court of the District of Northern Cyprus, and District Court decisions was accepted by EU.

• Not only the laws of "Immovable Property Commission of Northern Cyprus (and its related laws)" but also all laws of Northern Cyprus without any exception are recognized at European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR): http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/Pages/search.aspx#{"fulltext":["Pavlides"],"documentcollectionid2":["CASELAW"],"itemid":["001-122907"]} ECtHR Decision 02.07.2013, App. nos. 9130/09 and 9143/09; Pavlides v. Turkey; Georgakis v. Turkey. ECtHR: "...notwithstanding the lack of international recognition of the regime in the northern area, a de facto recognition of its acts may be rendered necessary for practical purposes. Thus, THE ADOPTION BY THE AUTHORITIES OF THE "TRNC" OF CIVIL, ADMINISTRATIVE OR CRIMINAL LAW MEASURES, AND THEIR APPLICATION OR ENFORCEMENT WITHIN THAT TERRITORY, may be regarded as HAVING A LEGAL BASIS in domestic law for the purposes of the Convention".
  Note: In the related above case, the application of Greek Cypriots was found to be "INADMISSABLE" by ECtHR and IMMEDIATELY REJECTED by ECtHR! That is to say, the applicant Greek Cypriots were expelled just at the beginning of the process. Case was never handled by the ECtHR!
  
• Anthony Cullen and StevenWheatley (2013): "The Human Rights of Individuals in De Facto Regimes under the European Convention on Human Rights"

Human Rights Law Review 13:4

p. 708: ECtHR did follow the position in international law that not all acts of a de facto government are to be regarded as being without legal validity. (AF: NC formed District as an act; that District is de jure; NC formed Imm Pro Comm; that IPC is legal; etc.).

p. 709: The Grand Chamber of ECtHR accepted that the judicial system in the TRNC could be considered to be established by law.

p. 710: The ECtHR has continued to recognise the utility of the government system established under the TRNC Constitution.

3. My offer: Let's obey your 1st suggestion.

For the Districts, instead of "District de jure, District de facto", "District (C), District (NC)" is suitable with international law.

4. I thank you very much since you simulate your offer very nice. Your way looked nice, and will be nicer and better with my above info is also taken into account.

5. I will follow your way, and soon give an example like you did for a municipality.

Alexyflemming (talk) 18:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

6. As I promised; here is the simulation of my offer: Karmi.

Note that "pushpin map size" is 300 pt in almost all of the articles in discussion and besides legal issues, for visual perspective as well "District (C), District (NC)" is totally suitable.

Alexyflemming (talk) 20:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Fine by me! Then we can both use that formula. (No need to use a legalistic sledgehammer to explain, though.) --T*U (talk) 20:46, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

OK, then, let's start making related edits. I enjoyed your style. You find that of me fine.Alexyflemming (talk) 20:50, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Why can't we have them the way they were before? Why did you have to change them? (And no, line wrapping in your browser isn't a good enough reason.) 31.153.94.214 (talk) 00:11, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Administrative units (villages, municipalities,..) of Northern Cyprus is also legal. They can be members of int'l organizations with the legal personality they have. "de jure, de facto" is peculiar to "Cyprus, Northern Cyprus" issue; even that one is also restricted to UN scope. Please read above all the explanation I did. Also, 300 pt issue is not "line wrapping in the browser", the frame of infobox gets too larger than the length of the map, and infobox appearance totally damaged at all.Alexyflemming (talk) 05:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I do not really care too much about which solution is chosen, as long as the linking is made in a balanced way, but I think that the solution we arrived to above is easyer to use for the average reader. (It also, IMO, looks nicer.) The main thing for me is to have a working solution that is not prone to eternal reverts. --T*U (talk) 06:42, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Is this an acceptable alternative, so that we might avoid repeating the country name (even if it's just the initials)? 31.153.94.214 (talk) 10:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

You are subsetting "District" under "Country (de facto): Northern Cyprus" which implicitly reflects "District" is also a de facto entity. However, all Districts, municipalities, etc. of Northern Cyprus is as legal as those of Cyprus:

- EU signed many contracts between municipalies and Districts of Northern Cyprus in 269 millions Euro aid package. When disagreements happened, cases were decided in District (courts of NC). The decisions of those courts were taken as legal by EU. Many

- There are many int'l organizations to which municipalities of NC are members.

- Yeni Boğaziçi municipality of NC became member of int'l Cittaslow. According to Cittaslow regulations, any municipality of Cyprus must take permission of Yeni Boğaziçi of NC (closest Cittaslow member) in order to be a member of Cittaslow! You see what I mean...

I explained all legal baseline (those of ECtHR, Grand Chamber of ECtHR, etc.) above.

Alexyflemming (talk) 10:52, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Your interpretation of an EU court ruling is irrelevant here. All the infobox does is indicate that the district belongs to NC, which is internationally considered to occupy RoC land. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 11:02, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

"NC is internationally considered to occupy RoC land". Nope! It is "UN'ly cosidered to occ...". Northern Cyprus is an (observer) member of Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO). Namely, OIC and ECO recognize Northern Cyprus. OIC and ECO are parts of international arena. Being "observer" or "full" member does not affect legality. North Korea, Switzerland,...once "observer" members of UN.

That said, many people still do not know the difference between "recognition" and "legality". Recognition has nothing to do with legality (ICJ, 2010, Kosovo: "Recognition is a political issue, not legal"). That is to say, even if NC hadn't been recognized by Turkey also, then that will still not change legality/illegality of NC.Alexyflemming (talk) 11:18, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

What's this in reply to? Illegal occupation is a matter of international law, hence "de jure" and "de facto". 31.153.94.214 (talk) 14:35, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I suggest that instead of the legalese de-whatever, we label Cyprus w/ 'Country' and Northern Cyprus w/ 'Country (controlled by)'. Would you find that agreeable? 31.153.94.214 (talk) 17:06, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I've made the change to this one article. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 17:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

The de jure / de facto has a long-standing consensus, so I think we should keep to that. I liked IP31's first suggestion. I cannot see that it does indicate anything about the legality/illegality of the districts. --T*U (talk) 17:26, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

It would be nice to come to a consensus on how to style the infoboxes. I'm ok with either. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 10:10, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Agree! I withdraw my last reservation and support your current "formula". Let's go for it! --T*U (talk) 13:51, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

@TU-nor: I also agree with your point. You can go ahead and implement IP 31.153.94.214's suggestion. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 17:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit summaries

You did it again! Your edit summary Edit based on consensus (see my talk page) here is deceptive. You know perfectly well that there is no consensus for your "invasion" / "hostilities" edit. Using misleading edit summaries is disruptive. --T*U (talk) 06:53, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Consensus is 1. "de jure, de facto" only in Country info 2. "District (N), District (NC)"

As for the 2nd issue:

removal of any mention of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus, replacing any mention with "the events of 1974" or "the hostilities of 1974":

United Nations's standard way of currently handling the issue is from neutral point of view always:

United Nations' Official WebsiteUNFICYP Mandate: "...Following the hostilities of 1974, ..."

United Nations' Official WebsiteUNFICYP Background: "Since the events of 1974, ..."

The descriptions you qualify as "euphemisms" are used by United Nations.

There is no Serbia in Pristina in Kosovo infobox! See also Sukhumi of Abhasia! "De jureness, de factoness" is only in UN base (and in those who accept UN in their regulations). Northern Cyprus is member of myriad int'l organizations! Hence, even though I do not participate in the presentation now, just for the sake of reaching minimal consensus, I keep my objection silent for the time being.Alexyflemming (talk) 08:39, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

You are avoiding the point. You made an edit, stating that it is based on consensus (with me). Part of that edit is not based on (our) consensus. The edit summary is misleading, indicating that (our) consensus covers the whole edit. I resent that. --T*U (talk) 09:00, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

When writing "de jure, de facto", the baseline is UN decision. Then, rejecting "hostilities, events, etc..of 1974" when the same UN is using "hostilities, events, etc..of 1974" has the meaning that "when UN does smt that suits my interests, then I take that one; when UN does smt that does not suit me, then I throw it". This approach is not my approach. Looking at Pristina, Sukhumi, etc. when these cities are covered and handled in WP is really explanatory how a neutral and objective one must cover the entities in WP independent of nationalism, fanatism, etc.Alexyflemming (talk) 11:43, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I am talking about your edit summary, which I resent as deceptive and misleadimg. --T*U (talk) 15:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Just wait till you see what's coming "following a discussion at Alexyflemming". 31.153.94.214 (talk) 20:15, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Question

In many of the articles about places in NC you have added info about the population exchange, ending with "the Turkish Cypriots in the south of the island moved to the north, some of which located to Xxx." Such information ought to be sourced. Do you have a source showing where the TCs were located? --T*U (talk) 07:29, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

"2011 Northern Cyprus Census" was organized under the auspieces of United Nations and under the witnessing of UN observers. The results of this census is here. In this file, the number of Turkish Cypriots in each village is given.

The municipality web pages of the Turkish Cypriot villages also explain from which part of the south of Cyprus Turkish Cypriots came. I added lots of official websites of these Turkish Cypriot municipalities in the infoboxes. Some of them has English pages as well. For solely Turkish ones, Google Translate may be a medicine for you.Alexyflemming (talk) 08:47, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

As far as I can see, there is nothing in the Census to show what villages received people from the south during the exchange. If there is, please point it out to me.

It is all very well to add local web cites, but my point is that the information itself ought to be sourced in the main text. If you have any source showing where the exchangees were located, I will be more than happy to help adding the sources. --T*U (talk) 09:07, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

It would be better we create a Wiki page which would include:

- The names of all villages in Cyprus (including their Greek and Turkish names besides English ones)

- The roots of Greek Cypriots who live now in Cyprus (i.e. from which village in the north they pass to the south)

- The roots of Turkish Cypriots who live now in Northern Cyprus (i.e. from which village in the south they pass to the north)

- Last column of the table should include the related sources.

People wrongly write different names. For example, Achna is "Köprülü", not "Düzce". I think, a column should also be included for the Google Earth coordinates so that all mention the same thing in a discussion.

Alexyflemming (talk) 11:55, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

It is fine that you want to create such an article. I am, however, asking you for a source (to use in the various articles) for where the exchangees were located. Do you have one? --T*U (talk) 15:26, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I have seen lots of mentionings about this info in websites of municipalities. But, each one mentions its own roots. Wait a little so that I reply you with a source that gives collective of all related.Alexyflemming (talk) 19:17, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Panagra, Girne

We should be handing out medals for most-lopsided articles started. Is your aim to purge any mention of the RoC from Turkish Cypriot pages? 31.153.94.214 (talk) 19:51, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Nope! My aim is to reflect just the facts, nothing else. See here Pristina. Here "Serbia" is also mentioned. But, look how it is mentioned! As it must be! As the most encyclopedia covers in all over the world! As the most non-Cypriot Wiki articles do! Look also here: Sukhumi.

I will add RoC cover as it must be done. See Panagra, Girne in a little while. I will inform you when I did.Alexyflemming (talk) 19:56, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

The fact is that it's claimed by the RoC. Where was any mention of that? 31.153.94.214 (talk) 20:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Wait a minute please. You will see how it is done in the most perfect way! I wrote "I will inform you".Alexyflemming (talk) 20:10, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I did it! Look Panagra, Girne now.

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find anybody who'll agree to this change. 31.153.94.214 (talk) 20:22, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

1. This is the way how Wikipedia handles the disputed locations...There is definitely a dispute in Cyprus as well.

2. Yes, there is a time lag between learning and digestion: Armenians said, showed, stated,...etc. billions of times "Armenian Genocide". In 2013, European Court of Human Rights said "1915 events cannot be qualified as Genocide" and punished Switzerland. Now (perhaps always previously), Armenians know the reality, but still they have not digest ECtHR's 2013 decision till now!Alexyflemming (talk) 20:38, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

There's no global consensus on handling 'disputed locations'. What do Armenians have to do with this? 31.153.94.214 (talk) 20:44, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

I wrote this to indicate someones (Armenians, GCs, etc.) could not easily come to a consensus; Notice Cyprus Negotiations started at 1968, GCs rejected 2004-Annan and Cyprus Negotiations still continue...Alexyflemming (talk) 21:03, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Please stop using the TRNC district template without obtaining consensus

You have to get consensus for that, which you have not presently. I have reverted your POV changes at Panagra, Girne until you get the proper consensus for the new template through an RfC or template approval process. Using templates to promote the concept of the independence of TRNC is not a proper use of Wikipedia and is disruptive. Thank you for your cooperation. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 01:12, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

October 2014

Your recent editing history at Template:Northern Cyprus-note shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:51, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:Northern Cyprus-note. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
Stop your longterm edit-warring. You have no WP:CONSENSUS for your POV and WP:DROPTHESTICK at long last. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 20:20, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5