Talk:Melilla

map

The map sucks. Where is Melilla? AxelBoldt 13:30, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Immigration issues

I think some comments should be added regarding the recent problems that they are having with illegal immigration. I just saw something in the news and came here looking for info, but there is nothing in this article.Anagnorisis 19:57, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Also note the rather conflicting content on Melilla_border_fence and on this page. Cite from Melilla_border_fence: In October 2005, over 700 SubSaharan migrants camping on nearby Mount Gurugú tried to enter Spanish territory from the Moroccan border. Many of them were shot. The debate whether were Moroccan Gendarmerie Royale or the Spanish Guardia Civil who shot them is still without conclusion . And on this page In October 2005, over 700 sub-Saharan migrants tried to enter Spanish territory from the Moroccan border. Many of them were shot in the back by the Moroccan Gendarmerie.

82.134.53.194 13:13, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Category

I have substituted the Category:Cities in Morocco with Category:Morocco. Melilla is not in the state of Morocco. It is however an important topic for Morocco. --Error 04:15, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

There's no flag. 130.79.229.160 13:22, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

What does "ISO 3166-1" mean? It's just appended to the introduction with no explanation whatever.

• Click the link: ISO 3166-1 (but basically, it's the standard that sets two- or three-letter and number codes for each country/region). howcheng {chat} 06:53, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

www.melilladirecto.com

www.melilladirecto.com televisión en internet

changed location map

I had trouble with the other map, didn't really have any context for where the arrow was pointing to, and even thought the inset (of the Canary Islands) was in relation to the topic: i.e., that Melilla was a group of islands, when I first looked at it. Hope the replacement is considered an improvement. Jauntymcd 03:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Another question: why is the smaller map (detail of Melilla) from a Polish source? Nothing against Polish sources, but it would be good to have one with English details instead. Can anyone find one? I was not able to today. Drkeithphd 15:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

There's a Spanish version at Image:Melilla es.png. I could make an English version if someone is willing to translate the labels. I can figure out "Spain", "Mediterranean Sea", and "Morocco" -- do the rest need to be translated too? howcheng {chat} 16:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

That's enought; the other toponyms should stay as they are. Apcbg 17:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. howcheng {chat} 20:08, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

City culture and society

I changed this section's name because the previous ("Architecture") was by all means outdated by the content itself: feel free to edit with any other section's title which you deem as more suitable than the new one.

Still, my point is not the title but the two last paragraphs, specially the first one (the second only follows that one and is secondary). It reads

However, in contrast to its image as a multicultural utopia, the Muslim population suffers the highest unemployment rate, the lowest rate of high school graduates, and the lowest representation in the city government. Many Muslims complain that Tamazight is looked down upon as a second-class language. It is not taught in schools and is rarely heard on the state television station. There has only been one Muslim president, Mustafá Aberchán of the Coalition for Melilla political party, installed in 1999 and whose term lasted only one year before his being ousted. Aberchán claims that the current president, Juan José Imbroda, once said that, "Melilla was not 'ready' for a Muslim president." The coalition currently holds seven out of 25 seats in the local parliament.

Well, in the first place, there is no "multicultural utopia" going on in Melilla, at least that I know. But, more important than that, I can't get the point in "the Muslim population suffers (...) the lowest representation in the city government". Well, this is no punishment, but the democratic test and, even worse, it is taking for granted that Muslim are a monolythic bloc which can not vote for other options which are not confessional Muslim. Melilla's local parliament is democratic and not made up from ethnic quotas whatsoever. Also it mixes matters in a tricky way when it says that "Muslims complain that Tamazight is looked down upon as a second class language" also equating Muslim to Tamazight when the actual Tamazight discrimination is much higher in Morocco (a Muslim country) than in Melilla.

I'd appreciate a rewriting of these two paragraphs from any of the 'usual suspects' in this page so that the present poor edition is fine tuned. Thanks. Mountolive 04:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I am moving the whole thing here to see if someone has some suggestion. As for myself, I can't figure out how to go about it: my feeling is that is not encyclopedic but it seems to be referring to a vague cultural discomfort which doesn't seem to be a real issue for the city at the moment.

In contrast to its image as a multicultural utopia, the Muslim population suffers the highest unemployment rate, the lowest rate of high school graduates, and the lowest representation in the city government. Many Muslims complain that Tamazight is looked down upon as a second-class language. It is not taught in schools and is rarely heard on the state television station. There has only been one Muslim president, Mustafá Aberchán of the Coalition for Melilla political party, installed in 1999 and whose term lasted only one year before his being ousted. Aberchán claims that the current president, Juan José Imbroda, once said that, "Melilla was not 'ready' for a Muslim president." The coalition currently holds seven out of 25 seats in the local parliament.

Members of Imbroda's conservative Popular Party, meanwhile, counter that the coalition promotes religious sectarianism. Imbroda himself insists that Melilla will never be ceded to Morocco "because no one wants to go backwards."

Mountolive 01:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Ethnicity

Are people of Melilla - light-skinned European or dark-skinned African? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.218.253 (talk) 07:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

The Melillan people are totally European. 79.154.22.192 (talk) 13:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

legal status

I think the status of melilla (the same that ceuta) is not very clear. Talk about the similirities with gibraltar but dont talk about that gibraltar is in the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories and melilla is not consider a colony. Also, melilla is a mainland part of spain and gibraltar is a bot. I think the ceuta´s paragraph explain better the situation:

"The government of Morocco has repeatedly called for Spain to transfer the sovereignty of Ceuta and Melilla, along with uninhabited islets such as the islands of Alhuceima, Velez and the Perejil islet. The Spanish position states that both Ceuta and Melilla are integral parts of the Spanish state, and have been since the 15th century, centuries prior to Morocco's independence from Spain in 1956. Morocco denies these claims and maintains that the Spanish presence in Ceuta and the other presidios on its coast is a remnant of the colonial past which should be ended. However, the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories do not consider those Spanish territories to be colonies."

Thanks for you attention. Best Regards Verboom (talk) 08:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

OK. This is a subject of which I am generally ignorant, but as a matter of encyclopedic style, I agree with you. The current text on this page, Melilla, is:

"Morocco claims Melilla, along with Ceuta and various small Spanish islands off the coast of Africa (Plazas de soberanía) that are sovereign posts. Morocco bases its claim on the fact that the area was part of the Idrisid and other succeeding Muslim dynasties from 791 until 1497, when the city was taken by Castile.

The government of Morocco has also drawn comparisons with Spain's territorial claim to Gibraltar, which is a British Overseas Territory situated on the mainland of Spain.[citation needed] In both cases, the national governments and local populations of the contended territories reject these claims by a wide margin. Spanish sources claim that unlike the Protectorate territories included in former Spanish Morocco Melilla has been a constituent part of Spain since the very dawn of Spain as an independent country, the city being a part of Castile for longer than even other current Spanish regions such as Navarre. These sources also dispute any ties between the former Muslim dynasties ruling the city and the present day Kingdom of Morocco,[citation needed] noting that if those latter dynasties were to be considered, most of present day Spain would be a part of Morocco, as well."

This isn't an article where the dispute should be the main focus of the whole thing - both Ceuta and Melilla are communities with interesting pasts and presents. I do not see any need to mention Gibraltar here - the analogies are obvious but have no legal relevance, nor are they notable, unless we can provide reliable sources that say so. I propose the following text for both pages:

"The political history is similar to that of towns in the region of the Moroccan Rif and southern Spain. Local rule passed through Amazigh, Phoenician, Punic, Roman, Ummayyad, Idrisid, Hammudid, Almoravid, Almohad, Marinid, and then Wattasid rulers. Ceuta and Melilla were annexed by Spain five years after the completion of the Reconquista of the Iberian Peninsula in 1492.

"The government of Morocco has repeatedly requested from Spain the sovereignty of Ceuta and Melilla, of Perejil Island, and of some other small areas lacking permanent population. The Spanish position is that both Ceuta and Melilla are integral parts of the Spanish state, and have been since the 15th century, centuries before Morocco's independence from Spain in 1956. Morocco denies these claims and maintains that the Spanish presence on or near its coast is a remnant of the colonial past which should be ended. The United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories does not include these Spanish territories as colonies."

I would add that we need some references for all this, even the Plazas de soberanía article doesn't have them. I also suggest that we may in due course need to extend the Plazas de soberanía article to cover the disputed status of Spanish territory on or very close to Africa (the arguments are very similar for all of them). The dispute doubtless has a history of its own and this probably justifies an article.

Comments please...

Richard Keatinge (talk) 12:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

The present paragraph is wrong for two reasons. The first is that Spain didn't exist in the 15th century, the second is that Ceuta was portuguese until the 17th century. Japf (talk) 23:48, 29 July 2010 (UTC)