||It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
|It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Yemen may be able to help!
File:Mokha port 1.jpg Nominated for Deletion
|An image used in this article, File:Mokha port 1.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
terminology used change request
subject: "Turkish domination" terminology in this article is wrong
I have noticed some errors in the article. In the article "Turkish domination" is used but it is wrong. The term "domination" is vague. and the term turkish is also vague in term of which cultural and ethnic community that it is pointing out. The pasha term in the time of ottoman empire was meaning commander of the army. It should be replaced by "sultan" which meaning is same as "king" or "emperor". The whole term "Turkish domination" should be replaced with "Ottoman Empire". Ottoman empire is not a "turkish" empire. In the ottoman empire population were not calling themselves as "turks". "Turk" became after 1923 a term defining a cultural community but it was still not defining an ethnic group. (source: Bozkurt Govenc "Turk kimligi - Kultur tarihinin kaymaklari " Edition "Boyut Yayinclik" 2010)(original edition: Türk Kimliği (Remzi 1992, Boyut 2008)
"Village was officially relocated" ...
The sentence " The village of Mocha was officially relocated 3 kilometres (1.9 mi) west along the Red Sea shore to accommodate the building and demolition of several coastal highways." is vague, a coastal road goes along the coast, so how can several do this? And the fact that it talks of both building and destruction of these roads is confusing. It also sounds like an infrastructure planning disaster and the destruction of a historical site, more information is needed! 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:53, 18 April 2013 (UTC)