Talk:Cyprus

So, 150.000 or 180.000 Greek Cypriots evicted from their homes?

In first paragraph it writes: "The intercommunal violence and subsequent Turkish invasion led to the displacement of over 150,000 Greek Cypriots[19][20] and 50,000 Turkish Cypriots,[21] and the establishment of a separate Turkish Cypriots political entity in the north.". Further down it writes: "International pressure led to a ceasefire, and by then 37% of the island had been taken over by the Turks and 180,000 Greek-Cypriots had been evicted from their homes in the north. At the same time, around 50,000 Turkish Cypriots moved to the areas under the control of the Turkish Forces and settled in the properties of the displaced Greek Cypriots." I wonder which claim is the true one? This is kinda confusing me. 30.000 its a lot of difference to just ignore it. --SilentResident (talk) 20:11, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

SilentResident, you will find sources stating over 150 to 200 thousand, the exact number of refugees depending on the methodology used to define the refugees. There are various parameters which different sources take into account thereby arriving at different numbers. For instance one may or may not be counting the wife in a family, if the wife prior to the invasion was from a city which is still free, versus the husband who's home is under occupation by Turks from Anatolia. So the numbers vary, and i think it is rational. The extend of the damage being 1/3 of the population roughly of the time. Why is it of such importance if it is 160, 170 or 210 thousands? What changes? If you are thinking of a way to calculate the amount due from Turkey for loss of use of property, then bare in mind that a families children and grant children even if they never lived in their fathers and grandfathers properties they are considered refugees also. 23x2 _φ 14:56, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

In this case couldn't be better for the article's all paragraphs to write "150.000-180.000" rather than a plain "150.000" in one paragraph and "180.000" in another? ^_^ --SilentResident (talk) 03:07, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Nobody was evicted. They simply escaped or chose to go south. We have not done any good until now, believing the Greek's lies... --217.86.137.20 (talk) 15:46, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Republic of Cyprus

Is it proper to call "Kypriaki Dimokratia" Republic of Cyprus? The right translation is "Cypriot Republic" just like the official name of Greece: Hellenic Republic and not Republic of Hellas or Greece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.106.109.216 (talk) 13:51, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Unreferenced addition

A new editor made an unreferenced addition to the article, replacing the text "the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and recognised only by Turkey" with

"the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and recognised not only by Turkey but China,North Kore,Nepal,Russia & 56 Muslims Countries in the world Mauritania,Maldives,Western Sahara,Somalia ,Turkey ,Iran ,Algeria ,Afghanistan ,Yemen ,Tunisia ,Oman ,Comoros ,Djibouti ,Morocco ,Iraq ,Libya ,Pakistan ,Saudi Arabia ,Tajikistan ,Jordan ,Qatar ,Senegal ,Azerbaijan ,Egypt ,Mali ,Niger ,Gambia ,Uzbekistan ,Turkmenistan ,Indonesia ,Bangladesh ,Syria ,Guinea ,Kuwait ,Bahrain ,Palestine ,Kyrgyzstan ,United Arab Emirates ,Lebanon ,Albania ,Brunei ,Sudan ,Malaysia ,Sierra Leone ,Burkina Faso ,Chad ,Nigeria ,Eritrea ,Ethiopia ,Kazakhstan".

The edit was, rightly, reverted. However I note that there is no reference for recognition by Turkey alone, and suggest one be added forthwith if that statement is still correct; this confirms the statement but dates from 2005, so may be out of date. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:28, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

"WHO EVER WROTE THE ABOVE IN THE FIRST INSTANCE LIVES IN MARS OR IN HIS OWN WORLD"

WHAT A LOAD OF RUBBISH.........THE TURKISH OCCUPIED PART OF CYPRUS NO WAY IS RECOGNISED BY ANY OTHER COUNTRY THEN TURKEY (WELL MAY BE NOT LOL)...IF THATS THE CASE WHY IS IT THAT NO AIRLINES AROUND THE WORLD FLY DIRECT TO THAT PART OF CYPRUS??? ONLY TURKISH AIRLINES GO THERE AND CANT GO DIRECT THEY STOP IN TURKEY....AND WHY IS IT THAT THE SO CALLED "The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" DOES MOT HAVE ITS OWN CURRENCY?????...

THIS IS THE REPORT FROM THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT CONFIRMING THAT THE STATEMENT ABOUT THE SO CALLED"Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" IS RECOGNISED ONLY BY TURKEY (WELL ITS NOT CLEAR IF TURKEY DOES)BUT NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD TRADES WITH THEM OTHER THEN VIA TURKEY SO....READ THE FOLLOWING,

Directorate-General External Policies Policy Department Turkey and the problem of the recognition of Cyprus NOTE Abstract: This note reviews the current situation on the issue of recognition of the Republic of Cyprus by Turkey and makes an assessent of likely future developments. The note is intended for European Parliament Members of the EP delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee. ExPo/B/PolDep/Note/2005_16 20 Janvier 2005 NT/553930EN 2 PE 350.445 This note was requested by the European Parliament's Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee for its meeting on 23/24 February 2005. This paper is published in the following languages: English (original). Author: Anthony COMFORT DG3, Policy Department SCH 06B014, Luxembourg E-mail: acomfort@europarl.eu.int Manuscript completed in January 2005. Copies can be obtained through: E-mail: brose@europarl.eu.int Brussels, European Parliament, [20.01.2005]. The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. NT/553930EN 3 PE 350.445 Turkey and the problem of the recognition of Cyprus On Friday 17 December 2004 at the EU summit meeting in Brussels, the European Council agreed to open membership negotiations with Turkey on 3 October 2005. The principal obstacle to be overcome in the course of negotiations leading up to this decision concerned the recognition by Turkey of the Republic of Cyprus. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan is said to have initially threatened to walk out of the negotiations when the EU asked him to initial immediately a protocol to update Turkey's 1963 association agreement with the EU (known as the Ankara agreement) and to extend it to cover the EU's 10 new member states, including Cyprus. Eventually Mr Erdogan agreed to sign this protocol before 3 October 2005 and on that basis Heads of State and Government for the 25 existing Member States agreed to open negotiations for accession. For many observers, the signature of the protocol would amount to a de facto recognition of Cyprus, or at least a 'normalisation' of relations between Turkey and Cyprus, but the interpretation of recognition was rejected both by Prime Minister Erdogan and by Foreign Secretary Gul of Turkey in the following days. Background The Republic of Cyprus is the only internationally-recognised state on the island. The socalled "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" (or "TRNC") is recognised only by Turkey. Negotiations for the accession of Cyprus to the EU were conducted exclusively with the government of the Republic of Cyprus, although a delegation of Turkish Cypriots was invited by Presdient Cklerides to participate in the negotiations (an offer rejected by Mr Denktash); the enlargement of the EU that resulted is considered by the EU and its Member States as applying to the whole island. While the northern part of the island must be acknowledged as part of the Union, in fact its government since 1974 has not been in the hands of the Greek Cypriot-controlled Republic. The acquis communautaire is therefore suspended in the north. Under the terms of the 1960 constitution of Cyprus, agreed and implemented following the process of decolonisation of the island, Turkey considered that it (and the other two guarantor powers - Greece and the UK) possessed a right to "intervene"1; they made use of this right by 1 The accompanying treaty of guarantee, which was signed at the same time as the constitution of Cyprus in London on 19 February 1959 and which concerns the role of the "guarantor powers", states in Article 3 that: "In the event of any breach of the provisions of the present Treaty, Greece, the United Kingdom, and Turkey undertake to consult together, with a view to making representations, or taking the necessary steps to ensure observance of those provisions. In so far as common or concerted action may prove impossible, each of the three guaranteeing Powers reserves the right to take action with the sole aim of re-establishing the state of affairs established by the present Treaty." NT/553930EN 4 PE 350.445 sending soldiers in 1974 to protect the Turkish-speaking minority on the island. This intervention resulted in the division of the island which has continued to this day. The 35 to 40 000 Turkish soldiers which are currently stationed in Cyprus are considered by the government of the Republic as an occupying force. It is widely believed that recognition for the Republic by Turkey would lead to the general acceptance of the illegality of the presence of these troops on the island and thus substantially weaken the arguments advanced by Turkey for maintaining its military presence. It would also imply a "de-recognition" by Turkey for the "TRNC". It is for this reason that Mr Erdogan reacted so strongly in Brussels and has so far refused to sign the protocol or acknowledge the Republic of Cyprus as the true government of the whole island. The Turkish government ceased to recognise the Republic of Cyprus at the time of its intervention because it felt that this state and government wrongly claimed responsibility for the whole island and could no longer be said to represent the Turkish Cypriot minority. The Turkish position is that recognition can only be made in the circumstance of a general agreement on the status of the island, that is a solution to the 'Cyprus problem', such as that proposed last year in the context of the Annan Plan. This Plan was put to a referendum on 24 April 2004 in both Turkish and Greek Cypriot communities, but was accepted only by the Turkish Cypriots. Greek Cypriots voted against by a margin of 3 to 1, following a negative judgement on the negotiations led by the United Nations from President Tassos Papadopoulos. The reaction in Turkey to those aspects of the decision to open accession negotiations which concern Cyprus was negative in some quarters. But the government of Mr Erdogan has still been able to claim a significant political victory and has emerged stronger from this deal. Opening negotiations on EU accession is the anchor of his plans to modernise Turkey and the outcome of the Brussels summit has been broadly welcomed in the Turkish press. Assessment At the outcome of the negotiations on 18 December 2004, the Dutch Prime Minister (Jan Peter Balkenende) who was in the chair, stated that the agreement stopped short of a full recognition. He said: "It is not what you can call a formal legal recognition but it is a step that can lead to progress in this field". Mr Papadopoulos did not formally veto the decision to open negotiations, as was his right, but he did voice his disappointment and denied that the agreement by Turkey amounted to the offical recognition which his government had considered to be a pre-requisite to opening neogitations for Turkish accession. He nevertheless pronounced himself to be 'satisfied' with the outcome and stated that it was necessary to be 'realistic' in regard to the current impossibility of opening formal diplomatic relations between Turkey and Cyprus. Despite the negative assessments of several participants it seems evident that Turkey has acknowledged that negotiations for its own accession must be conducted with all twenty-five existing Member States, including Cyprus, and that therefore some acknowledgement of the government of the Republic of Cyprus is necessary. It is evident that the illogicality of the situation has been finessed; all sides assume tacitly that there must be not only the first step of signature by Turkey of the Ankara Agreement before October 2005 but also a final resolution of the Cyprus problem before negotiations can be completed and the outcome ratified by all Member States as well as Turkey. It is evident that Cyprus cannot be expected NT/553930EN 5 PE 350.445 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.43.25.119 (talk) 13:59, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

About the formatting of the IPA for Cyprus

I noticed that the English IPA for Cyprus has two alternatives, in the same IPA tag. As a result, the comma between the two alternative pronunciations is between two vertical bars, thus parsed and displayed as a secondary stress, making look like a single segment, while it's two different segments. To fix that, I used one IPA tag for each English pronunciation, leaving the comma out of any tag, so it's displayed as a comma, not a secondary stress. My change was reverted, and I don't understand the rationale behind that. Having it in a single tag causes problems. For the sake of clarity, I strongly suggest that it becomes accepted to use two tags, one for each possible pronunciation, with the comma not in any tag, so that it's displayed as a comma, not secondary stress. I will not attempt to change it again since people keep reverting it. So let's talk about it. Is there any reason it gets back reverted to a single IPA tag? --Meidei (talk) 22:08, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Coordinate error

{{geodata-check}}

The following coordinate fixes are needed for UTM Zone36 North

—182.72.231.186 (talk) 12:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure what correction you want made. Are you referring to this sort of UTM zone? If so, I can't find any mention at all of such a zone in the article (and Cyprus is in zone 36S, as this map shows). The coordinates (of Cyprus and Nicosia) present in the article appear to be correct, though I've tweaked the coordinates of Nicosia a bit. For now, I'm going to close this request; but if you can be more explicit about what you think needs to be corrected in the article, please post a new message below, including the {{geodata-check}} template, and someone will attempt to deal with your concern. Deor (talk) 14:34, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Requested move: Republic of Cyprus (03.03.2014)

Cyprus → Republic of Cyprus –
Rationale for the proposed page name change:
1. Fair Approach, Neutrality, Objectivity:
The reasons why "Republic of Ireland" is placed as "Republic of Ireland" instead of "Ireland" are mutatis mutandis same and valid with "Republic of Cyprus"
In Wikipedia, "Republic of Ireland" is not addressed as "Ireland", but "Republic of Ireland". The reasoning and philosphy behind this addressing are mutandis mutandis valid for "Republic of Cyprus" and "Cyprus (island)" as well.

The common parlance of "Cyprus" usually refers to island of Cyprus generally. Referring to the "island of Cyprus" with "the country Rep. of Cyprus" with 6 districts (Kyrenia, Famagusta, Nicosia, Paphos, Limassol, Larnaca) instead of the "island of Cyprus" is definitely leading myriad misconceptions and miscomprehensions. (referring wrongly to country Rep. of Cyprus instead of the true citation of island of Cyprus).

Cyprus is the common name for the island, which has a much longer history than the state. Cyprus means so many different things to so many different people. The island is the broader usage. It is not at all clear that Cyprus refers to the country more than the island. It is generally best with a name like that to refer to the more general entity. "Republic of Cyprus" is a recognised disambiguator for the country.

"Cyprus" has been used for the island for much longer than the modern state, by more than several thousand years. There really a need to move the article on the state to "Republic of Cyprus".
NGrams:
Cyprus (from 1900 to 1959) (before "Republic of Cyprus" have born)
Cypriot (from 1900 to 1959) (before "Republic of Cyprus" have born)

2. Robust and Fair Titling:
Titling "Republic of Cyprus" as "Republic of Cyprus" is robust, fair, and ethical. The current titling sends all the "Cyprus", "Cypriot" mentionings to "Republic of Cyprus", which is definitely wrong.

Wikipedia guidelines and policies (disambiguation guidelines (WP:DABCONCEPT and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC)), and current usages promote this re-titling.

When someone talks about the culture, history, geography, sport, people, and so on, of "Cyprus", they mean not the "country Rep. of Cyprus".

3. Almost closed to objections:
The usage of "Cyprus" for "Republic of Cyprus" has definitely includes many bias/conditioning in it. On the other hand, the usage of "Republic of Cyprus" for "Republic of Cyprus" includes no bias/conditioning and removes any such.

4. Google Search:
"Cyprus": 92,700,000 results
https://www.google.com.tr/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=mEoUU-vHMamh8wfX64CADg#q=Cyprus

"Cyprus" without "Republic of Cyprus": 1,290,000 results
https://www.google.com.tr/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=mEoUU-vHMamh8wfX64CADg#q=Cyprus++-%22Republic+of+Cyprus%22

5. Harmony and Consistency of Wikipedia can be reached only with Correct Context: Correct and Fair Usage in other Wiki Languages (Reaching Consistency with Other Foreign Wiki Pages):
Cyprus As "Island", not "State":
Alemannish Wiki: https://als.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zypern (for the country: Republik Zypern was used)
QirimTatarish Wiki: https://br.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiprenez (for the country: Republik Kiprenez was used)
FRENCH WIKI: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chypre (for the country: Chypre (pays) was used)
GERMAN WIKI: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zypern (for the country: Republik Zypern was used)
Magyar Wiki: https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciprus (for the country: Ciprusi Koztarsasag was used)
SIMPLE ENGLISH WIKI: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyprus (for the country: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Cyprus)
Suomi Wiki: https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kypros (for the country: Kyproksen tasavalta was used)
Turkish Wiki: https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C4%B1br%C4%B1s (for the country: Kibris Cumhuriyeti was used)
Turkmence Wiki: https://tk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kipr_Respublikasy (for the country: Kipr Respublikasy was used)
Zeeuws Wiki: https://zea.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyprus

Languages with Ambiguation Wiki Pages:
Azerbaijani Wiki:
Cyprus (Ambiguation Page): https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kipr
Republic of Cyprus: https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kipr_Respublikas%C4%B1
Island of Cyprus: https://az.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kipr_(ada) (Kipr_ada means Cyprus_(island))

Balarussian Wiki:
Republic of Cyprus: https://be.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D1%8D%D1%81%D0%BF%D1%83%D0%B1%D0%BB%D1%96%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D0%9A%D1%96%D0%BF%D1%80 (Respublica Kipr) Island of Cyprus: https://be.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%92%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%9E_%D0%9A%D1%96%D0%BF%D1%80 (Vostrai Kipr)

Cavashla Wiki:
https://cv.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B8%D0%BF%D1%80 (Kipr)

6. The Consistency and Harmony of Titlings-in-Other-Languages in Software Programming in Wikipedia and Wiki-Syntax: Not only now but also for the one day in future, the importance of the "consistency and harmony" will be better understood for at least software programming approach of Wikipedia.

7. "Republic of Cyprus" redirects to "Cyprus" in various places of Wikipedia:
This is injection of bias/conditioning. Nothing else. See the degree of injection of bias/conditioning: Even Cyprus_(island) redirects to Cyprus(as Republic of Cyprus). Wikipedia is the PEDIA of the whole world, not the sole world of Helens. The Helens prevented the creation of even the "Cyprus (island)" article. This is completely injustice.

Note: Please specify all your pro-con arguements below the move request so that no troubles exists with the original move request. Alexyflemming (talk) 11:56, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

• Yes, it seems reasonable to me to follow the Ireland model -- in having a separate article for the island w/ its geography and whatever else. I think it is very hard to come to any sort of concrete conclusion about the manner in which the word's used most often, so for the sake of neutrality, I'm leaning towards support. It may have been better to have an RfC before the RM. — Lfdder (talk) 13:10, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

No. I disagree, this subject has been repeatedly discussed in the past, please see the archives. To me the above request perfectly aligns with a very strong Turkish POV, the official Turkish view one may find in Turkish sources. At its core lays the political aim of creating the environment for political recognition for TRNC on the Turkish occupied northern part of the Republic of Cyprus. What the international community sees as a nation state and Turkey sees as non existent. The island and the Republic of Cyprus are one 23x2 _φ 13:32, 3 March 2014 (UTC)