Talk:Blue Homeland

This is the talk page of a redirect that targets the page:
• Cyprus–Turkey maritime zones dispute
Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at:
• Talk:Cyprus–Turkey maritime zones dispute

This article was nominated for deletion on 28 December 2020. The result of the discussion was merge.

Article neutrality

I have added POV tag to the article [1] as there is a dispute over its neutrality [2]. The editor Caskination who created the article even though the Blue Homeland is already covered in another article (see Aegean dispute) is trying to maintain a certain POV which amounts WP:POVFORK. The problems so far are:

The removal of the much-needed clarification that the Blue Homeland is an irredentist and expansionist doctrine is supported by WP:RS media and analysts from all over the world, including American, French, Arab, Israeli, Turkish and Greek journalists.
The removal of info on the creator of Blue Homeland who held official positions.
Removal of much-needed quotation from the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and which independent media reported on, such as maximalist and uncompromising Greek and Greek Cypriot claims, as well Kastellorizo), even though I have provided the relevant WP:PRIMARY source from the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. These quotations are needed in order to understand the viewpoint of the side which created the Blue Homeland. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 11:07, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Selective removal of clarification that the Turkey's view on islands having no EEZ being a 'unique' interpretation not shared by any other country and not in accordance to UNCLOS.

The editor has argued that the article is under construction, however this doesn't solve the problem that they have removed information from the sources selectively.--- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 11:07, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please read what I wrote below. As I said, I will add all the parts you mentioned to the article properly. But you have to give me time. - Caskination ? 11:22, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:SilentResident: When we do any changes on the article, we can discuss here my friend. Firstly, I am still working on the article, this means you shouldn't remove the construction template. And I want to know that: My purpose is not to promote anything, and I know everything about Wikipedia policies, because I'm the pending changes reviewer. Tell me what you found wrong, but please don't revert my changes until I'm done. Now, if it suits you too, I'll do some changes on article, after that we can discuss the places you want, and we can change it if necessary. In this way, we can take a constructive path. Thanks. - Caskination ? 11:17, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to work on the article, however neutrality has to be maintained at all times, and that means, the clarifications to info already present in the article which you removed, are also present. WP:NPOV is one of Wikipedia's pillars and POV issues must be addressed independently and regardless of what plans are there for possible future expansions of the article. Also, you can consider WP:DRAFT instead. This way, you can work on it without any Editors getting in the way.

Please, you haven't responded to the issues i have pointed above. Can we discuss why have you reverted my latest edits?--- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 12:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I'm busy in my real life thats why I cannot respond quickly. The current version of the article is full of violations. In the title of "Turkey's view", Turkish expressions are given only from Greek sources with using judgmental language. Is it neutral point of view? I don't think so. I will answer one by one;

I removed the "Blue Homeland is an irredentist and expansionist doctrine" sentence because of the according to the "Avoid stating opinions as facts" title at the Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Explanation of the neutral point of view. If you had let me, I would have already explained them under the title of opposing views. As I said before: We have to let the reader decide.
Cihat Yaycı and Cem Gürdeniz are not admirals currently. More information is already exist in his (Cihat Yaycı) article. But if you want to add his current status, he is currently an associate doctor and an academic.
I removed because of the WP:NPOV title of "Prefer nonjudgmental language". But, as I said before if you had let me, I would have already explained them with the source of both sides.
The word "unique" is judgmental language.

So, I was going to write all of these already. But to write these statements in judgmental language like a stating rather than an opinion is a clear violation of neutrality. Just like any other article. Anyway, I will continue editing for a neutral point of view. - Caskination ? 17:15, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The "Prefer nonjudgmental language" is for editors attributing neutrally what the sources do say on the matter. The characterization of the Megali Idea as irredentist, or Greater Macedonia, Greater Albania, and the Mavi Vatan as irredentist concepts, isn't judgemental language, is a fact supported by the world's media and journalists abroad and the provided WP:RS on the matter. --- ❖ SilentResident ❖ ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 21:26, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]