Talk:Foreign relations of Kurdistan Region

Possible copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Diannaa (talk) 22:14, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Relations with Rojava

There really ought to be separated article for Iraqi Kurdistan–Rojava relations or at least some talk about it here. Charles Essie (talk) 06:17, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

• I've jusr created a draft article. Participation is welcomed. Charles Essie (talk) 17:51, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 2 April 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Suggest reopening discussion at Talk:Iraqi Kurdistan if you haven't already done so. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

---

Foreign relations of Iraqi Kurdistan → Foreign relations of Kurdistan Region – "Iraqi Kurdistan" is a geographical term refering to the Kurdish area in Iraq. Not all of "Iraqi Kurdistan" is under Kurdish control, therefore its misleading and plain wrong to call this article "Iraqi Kurdistan". Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 13:10, 2 April 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:46, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

• Keep - We need consistency of names of main articles (here Iraqi Kurdistan) and specialized articles (here Foreign relations of Iraqi Kurdistan). For name of main article see Talk:Iraqi Kurdistan/Archive 2#Article name. Jan CZ (talk) 09:32, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

We can keep the consistency if we change all the titles concerning "Iraqi Kurdistan". Why keep something we all know is misleading? --Ahmedo Semsurî (talk) 10:44, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Bilateral relations" section needs some editing.

A few examples:

"In 2004 was reported about the meetings of Israeli officials with Kurdish political leaders when Massoud Barzani, Jalal Talabani and the former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon publicly confirmed the good relations of Israel and Iraqi Kurdistan." - Does not make sense, wrong Grammar.

"Kurdistan and South Korea share strong diplomatic and economic relations as well as military support from the Korean Armed Forces." - 'Kurdistan and South Korea' military support from the Korean Armed Forces? No, 'Kurdistan receives military support from the Korean Armed Forces' is what the author meant, but wrote in a confusing way.

"The best example of the Kurdistan Region's evolving relations with its neighbors is its relationship with Turkey." - Seems unnecessary and does not fit in with normal Wikipedia style, in my opinion.

"Currently the United States has official policy towards the Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq." - Bad Grammar, but also unnecessary, what does this sentence achieve? It adds no information.

"US Kurdish policy starting initially with "contacts" to a covert "relationship" and finally to an overt "institutionalized relationship" embodied in an official US Kurdish policy." - It's not obvious what the author wants to say in this sentence, badly written, complex wording for no apparent reason.

I fixed 2 other wording issues that I saw, but I don't have a nice way to rewrite the ones here. Phantom147 (talk) 20:22, 19 October 2017 (UTC)