Talk:Greece/Archive 11

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

Changes are needed

Apparently, my and Sciophobiaranger's edits have been reverted by editors with Greek IP (go figure). Wikipedia is about truth, facts and not nationalism. Until 2013 everyone considered Greece a "developed market" but things have changed. At least three agencies have downgraded it to an "emerging" one. If you're going to state in the introduction that Greece is considered an advanced economy by the World Bank, you'll also have to present conflicting ideas, and they now exist. There is no mention of the economic crisis and instead everything is portrayed as perfect. That paragraph is totally biased.

Therefore, I propose changing from

Greece is a democratic,[16] developed country with an advanced high-income economy, a high standard of living[17][18] and a very high Human Development Index.[19]

to

Greece is a democratic high-income economy, according to the World bank, and has a very high Human Development Index, as classified by the UNDP.[16] Nevertheless, in 2013 Greece became the first country ever to be downgraded from "developed nation" status to "emergent economy" by MSCI, S&P Dow Jones, and Russell Investments, following what became known as the Greek Depression of the late 2000s-early 2010s.[17][18][19][20]

for a better encyclopaedia. Califate123! (talk) 16:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC) (just noticed talks are ongoing in the section above, so they can continue there if you prefer)

Agreed. They also reverted the added information added earlier in July about unemployment and debt. It seems that even when their arguments against adding it are fixed (e.g. added more than one source) they are still not fine with it and base their actions on either nationalism or lack of acknowledgment. It seems this is a continued cycle no matter what the information is on, unemployment, debt, and now the status of the country. Apparently all shouldn't be on a page about Greece!--Sciophobiaranger (talk) 16:06, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Apparently, my and Sciophobiaranger's edits have been reverted by editors with Greek IP (go figure). Again, please leave this silly, ethnocentric attacks. And BTW, how do you know my IP? This is utter nonsense. Also, one more time: This stuff is WP:RECENT and WP:UNDUE to be at the lead of the article. It may have a place at the Economy of Greece article but on the main article about Greece and especially at the lead is WP:UNDUEWEIGHT. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

You're the one still dwelling on what I said 30 minutes ago. We are more than ready for a discussion without any form of (perceived) attacks. What you say makes no sense at all. Why is saying "Greece is an advanced economy according to the World Bank" accepted in the lead but "Greece is an advanced economy according to the World Bank but an emerging according to so and so" not? Should we remove every reference to the % of people living under a 1$ a day in articles about sub-Saharan countries as well? It makes no sense. Califate123! (talk) 16:23, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

You're the one still dwelling on what I said 30 minutes ago. Why? Do your comments have an expiry date? Either you retract your nonsense or own up to it. As far as the stuff you are edit-warring to try to add to this article it is clearly undue weight and recentist as I have already explained. It is obvious we are not going to agree any time soon so we have to wait for more editors to comment. It is useless to keep repeating the same points amongst ourselves. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:29, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Again, please leave this silly, ethnocentric attacks. Ethnocentric? No, it's a logical conclusion. Like what has been said, you do not see this on any other country's page. They all contain information about unemployment and economic status. But the main argument is in the category above so I will not type a lot. Here's a definition of "ethnocentric": "evaluating other peoples and cultures according to the standards of one's own culture." So no, not ethnocentric. --Sciophobiaranger (talk) 16:42, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Ethnocentric? No, it's a logical conclusion. I still see no signs of you controlling yourself and stopping your ethnicity-based attacks. Please stop this nonsense as soon as you can. Good luck. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:45, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Please use the section above. Califate123! (talk) 16:49, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

You keep telling me to control myself yet you are the one calling other arguments/edits "useless" and "nonsense", and you continue to use adjectives that are meant to be demeaning in your argument. You called the conclusion "ethnocentric" when it does not even align to the definition of "ethnocentric". But you never answered the question, which shows who really needs the self-control.--Sciophobiaranger (talk) 16:54, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

You keep telling me to control myself yet you are the one calling other arguments/edits "useless" and "nonsense", and you continue to use adjectives that are meant to be demeaning in your argument. But you forgot one thing: By "useless" and nonsense" I describe your insulting nationality-based arguments. You don't seem to understand that. As far as the definition of "ethnocentric", that's just semantics. I meant "ethnicity-centered" arguments. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

And I use "patriotism" and "nationalism" to describe the unwarranted edits. You do not see why there are no other conclusions, because there are no other logical arguments. Just explain why they're being removed, please. And the arguments are not ethnocentric, that just does not make sense. --Sciophobiaranger (talk) 17:03, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)And the arguments are not ethnocentric, that just does not make sense. I thought I explained that before. How about "ethnicity-centred"? In other words, centred on the ethnicity of your "opponents". As far as arguments, please see Θεοδωρος's comments above as well as mine based on WP:LEAD, UNDUE, RECENT etc. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 17:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

A political party called "Golden Dawn" took over Greece in 2013, then afterward people from countries like Afghanistan were discriminated and not given citizenship there. Search for news about Greece since the rise of Golden Dawn, and then add such info to the article. }IMr*|(60nna)I{ 17:13, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I object to the proposed changes, on the grounds that those who propose them have failed to grasp the rather crucial distinction between a developed country and a developed market. Since Greece is defined as a developed country according to every measure used in the relevant Wikipedia article, there is no reason to remove that definition from this article. The same applies to the IMF's classification of Greece as an advanced economy, which is also omitted from the proposed new wording. I propose that the relevant IMF source, which was once included in the text, be reinserted. ·ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ· 17:42, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Greece was a developed country before 2013, and since then it's no longer developed because it suffers racism, declining economy, and increasing human rights abuses. Anyone paid attention to Amnesty International's reports on Greece? }IMr*|(60nna)I{ 17:45, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Do you have a reliable source to support that claim? I sincerely doubt that Amnesty International issues pronouncements on country classifications. ·ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ· 17:49, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Here's some links to sources:

http://neoskosmos.com/news/en/Amnesty-International-blasts-EU

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2014/04/golden-dawn-rise-far-right-euro-201441483840429923.html

http://www.epsu.org/a/10349

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/10/02/rise-of-greek-nationalist-golden-dawn-party-coincides-with-greeces-economic-crisis/

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/23/golden-dawn-greece-european-election

}IMr*|(60nna)I{ 18:10, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Another one:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/greek-court-orders-detention-of-far-right-golden-dawn-politician-1405003938

}IMr*|(60nna)I{ 18:13, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

So what are you saying, because Golden Dawn is on the rise we should downgrade Greece to 'developing country' status? There's also the KKK in the USA, let's downgrade that also. Wikipedia's own definition of "developing country" is: a nation with a lower living standard, underdeveloped industrial base, and low Human Development Index (HDI) relative to other countries. Greece has a very high human development index, high standards of living (average compared to the north-west of Europe but way above the world average) and an industrial base which has declined severely because of the crisis. I fail to grasp the connection between Golden Dawn and the fact that you want to change the classification of Greece from 'developed' to 'developing'. With your latest source, are you seriously saying that Greece should be moved to developing status because it sent people to jail?! --Philly boy92 (talk) 18:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

No, he actually thinks Golden Dawn "took over Greece in 2013". And that, as a result, Greece is no longer a developed country. Bizarre, I know. ·ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ· 18:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm glad ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ is right. }IMr*|(60nna)I{ 18:28, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

I suppose you do know that the National Front came 1st in the 2014 European Elections in France? Are you also arguing that France is no longer developed? --Philly boy92 (talk) 18:32, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Careful, he'll probably call you "ignorant" next. Everyone knows Golden Dawn conquered Greece in 2013! ·ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ· 18:38, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

"Philly boy92" hasn't recognized how much developed the United States and France are in contrast to their treatments of racism. France is already developed because of its technology, like the United States. However, both countries had have dealt with racism. }IMr*|(60nna)I{ 18:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

It's not that I have not recognised the development levels of France and the USA - it's that your argument is completely unfounded (unfounded is the polite version). What technology exactly is it that Greece lacks, and thus should be downgraded? What did France do to combat racism that Greece did not? Last time I checked, sending people to jail is what we do in the civilised world. Also, are you saing that Nazi Germany was an underdeveloped/developing nation because of the rampant racism in its top offices? I think what you don't recognise is that racism has nothing to do with how developed a countryis. --Philly boy92 (talk) 18:50, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

If the Human Development Index was adjusted for tighter human rights then both France's and the USA's HDI rankings are (at least slightly) lower. Racism is a human rights abuse. The infamous Nazi Germany's development level remains uncertain for me because while the economy recovered, it was criticized for its Holocaust. }IMr*|(60nna)I{ 19:01, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Well then too bad that the HDI does not take into account human rights abuses. Until it does, this conversation is considered over by me, wikipedia is not a forum. --Philly boy92 (talk) 19:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Recent edit-warring

Edit-warring has erupted attempting to add WP:UNDUE, recentist original research at the lead of the article. This information may belong at the article of the economy of Greece but not at the lead of this article. Also the edit-warring edit is erasing the fact, and its source, that Greece is a democratic country. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 15:34, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

The so-called edit warring has erupted because people who oversee this article have a blind-sense of patriotism. If you look at other articles, say the United Kingdom, United States, or even the Italian ones they all list unemployment and information. When you do CTRL+F on the Greece page a mention of unemployment is not even mentioned. Another thing, the reverted edit of the list of organizations that list Greece as an "emerging market" said there was only a single source. Of course two more were provided, yet of course, they were reverted by the same people that are too patriotic to allow important information to be offered on a wikipedia page. And the same excuse that it should be on the "Economy of Greece" page is unwarranted and invalid. How come it is okay for unemployment and inequality information to be posted on other countries' pages but when anything bad about the Greek Economy, or the country overall, is posted it is reverted and no valid argument is provided? There are plenty of sources that warrant the information to be provided and the "badmin" tactics really do need to stop. If you are so desperately offended by it, then do not bother to visit the page. What is added is relevant and hiding information isn't helpful! And you do not see this on any other page regarding a country. --Sciophobiaranger (talk) 15:55, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) When you start controlling yourself and stop the personal attacks about "blind sense of patriotism" and "badmin" tactics (whatever this nonsense means), then I can discuss this with you. Otherwise any discussion under your attacks is simply useless. Please retract your PA nonsense as a sign of good faith. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Agree with Sciophobiaranger I support the changes for all the reasons I've already stated (and without any bias). And I'm sorry, but no one is attacking anyone and the discussion can proceed. Califate123! (talk) 16:15, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

And I'm sorry, but no one is attacking anyone and the discussion can proceed. Was I talking to you? Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:24, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

You are telling me to control myself, yet you are the one participating with others in the exclusion of information due to a sense of nationalism. Once again, provide a good argument for removing the information. You see similar information on other countries' pages, so why is it not allowed on Greece's? It's not nonsense, it's extremely evident. Just give proper reasons for not allowing any information on unemployment, debt, and the fact that 3 major global firms have downgraded Greece's economic status. How come this information cannot be on a page about, you know, Greece? Stop calling our arguments "nonsense".--Sciophobiaranger (talk) 16:40, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

...yet you are the one participating with others in the exclusion of information due to a sense of nationalism. It is evident to me that you still cannot control yourself since you are still using nationality arguments to attack me. When you have successfully controlled yourself please let me know. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:42, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Offer an argument or stop replying. It's as simple as that. Why do you keep reverting important and valid information?--Sciophobiaranger (talk) 16:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Offer an argument or stop replying. Do you think that your ethnicity-based attacks constitute arguments? When you retract them, we can have a serious discussion. But discussion is useless under conditions of ethnicity-based arguments. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:56, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

It's not an attack of ethnicity, but you have offered no counter-arguments as to why you removed the information. Until you do so, it will be believed to be because of patriotism/nationalism. If you go on the page of the United States or United Kingdom, there are tons of information of debt, unemployment, and the status of the economy. So it does not make sense why Greece shouldn't include important information. So answer the question, why do you keep reverting the information? --Sciophobiaranger (talk) 16:58, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Until you do so, it will be believed to be because of patriotism/nationalism. "it will be believed" by whom? Please leave the WP:WEASELWORDS. Please read WP:AGF and try to stop this nonsense. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 17:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Because it's simply misleading. Greece's status as a developed country is independent of its classification as a developed or emerging market as defined by financial services companies. The former is an economic and geopolitical term, while the latter is used purely for private investment purposes. It is worth noting that Greece is still classified as a developed market by FTSE, which has a much higher profile than MSCI or Russell Investments. I'd certainly never heard of them before. In any case, the position of major international organizations, and Wikipedia's own article on the subject, should take precedence. ·ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ· 17:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ for your excellent points. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 17:09, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

If you follow the references provided, including some on Market journals, you'll see that "developed market" equals "developed country". But I give you that, no problem. I can change "country" to "market". But saying Greece has high standards of living is ludicrous considering that by the end of 2014 they will be 25 to 50% less than those of 2006/2007. Califate123! (talk) 10:54, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

In reality, of course, things are not nearly so clear-cut. Greece is a developed country/advanced economy according to the CIA, IMF, OECD, World Bank, UN, etc., a developed market according to FTSE, and (since last year) an emerging market according to MSCI and Russell Investments. I agree with Dr.K. that any reference to the latter does not belong in the lead (per WP:UNDUE and WP:RECENT), and should instead be included in the Economy of Greece article. Have you even looked? By the way, the last person who tried to insert that information in the lead of that article has been blocked indefinitely. ·ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ· 03:34, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree. The fact remains that Greece is recognised as a developed country by the reliable sources mentioned by ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ and we do not need to second-guess these reliable sources using WP:OR fillers such as "Nevertheless" and making up WP:SYNTH controversies. The lead is not the place to advertise that certain firms have downgraded Greece's status, while not mentioning that others, such as FTSE, have not. Such WP:UNDUE, WP:RECENT controversies belong in the Economy of Greece article but certainly not at the lead of this article. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 09:14, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Another important detail that has yet to be mentioned in this discussion is that Greece is only classified as an emerging market by 2 of the 9 sources cited in the relevant Wikipedia article. It's hardly a consensus view. •ΘΕΟΔΩΡΟΣ• 09:42, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Official Religion doesn't show up

It's written in infobox but it doesn't seem to be working. Also The Greek Constitution recognizes the Orthodox Christian faith as the "prevailing" faith of the country, while guaranteeing freedom of religious belief for all written in the article. --Kafkasmurat (talk) 14:46, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Minorities

Minorities tab is empty. How did we miss that? See: Minorities in Greece --Kafkasmurat (talk) 14:48, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

It seems to be covered here across the "migrations", "religions" and "languages" sections, within the "demographics" chapter, which seems like a reasonable solution to me. Is anything specific missing? Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:55, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2014

Please change the following sentence:

International railway lines connect Greek cities with the rest of Europe, the Balkans and Turkey, although as of 2011 they have been suspended, due to the financial crisis.

into

International railway lines connect Greek cities with the rest of Europe, the Balkans and Turkey.

as the railway lines are open again for international travel (may 2014).

87.251.49.80 (talk) 21:10, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Done Using EURAIL to verify that service is restored: http://www.eurail.com/news/important-greece-train-update -- ferret (talk) 22:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Greece is no more a Balkan country than Italy is?

That seems to be the assertion being made on the Balkans article by an editor who says that because there are some small Aegean islands in Greece that are close to the Turkish coastline (which the editor equates as being islands in "Anatolia") Greece is only partially within the Balkan peninsula, with the implication that Greece should not to be included amongst "countries whose territories lie completely within the Balkan peninsula" but should actually be amongst "countries that lie partially within the Balkan peninsula", making Greece no more a Balkan country than Italy is [1]. I've had some increasingly personal run-ins with this editor on other articles, so don't want to get into an edit war - so I am asking for some editors more expert in the field to give their opinions. Do it on the Balkans page please (I'm just asking on this page because it will be a busier talk page) Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:50, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Education

I believe we should mention that the Greek Education System isn't satisfactory to provide knowledge, abilities etc. to the students. According to recent surveys, our system has ranked last in the EU. The governments of Greece have often made changes, without having any real result- for example, only this year (2014) thousands of students were left outside of the universities and the technological institutions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.219.233.176 (talk) 14:12, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 September 2014

In this lead sentence "This rich legacy is partly reflected by the 18 UNESCO World Heritage Sites located in Greece..." change 18 to 17 per http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/gr. 79.69.196.167 (talk) 13:48, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Done. Thank you. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 16:19, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Recent image additions

I have noticed that during my absence from Wikipedia a series of images, including but not limited to the Hagia Sophia and the arms of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, were added to the article. Apart from the fact that these do not contribute to the history section per se, is there any particular reason they are there? In my opinion they make the article look incredibly populist and like the pages of a Greek state-sponsored history book. I think they should be removed and the history section made a bit more neutral. Further, there isn't really any reason why there should be four-five images per section, they make the article very crowded. --Philly boy92 (talk) 21:26, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

What does "relatively" high quality of life means in the intro?

I would appreciate if someone could explain to me what does "relatively" mean in the intro, when it describes the quality of life in Greece. The quality of life in Greece is by absolute standards HIGH. There is no relativity or anything. When a country has an very high HDI, ranking 29 in 187 countries, when Life expectancy is among the world's top 25, when infant mortality is among the best in the world, then there is no "relative" quality of life, there is only high quality of life. I think someone misinteprits the recent economic crisis, with the standards of living and quality of life. In Greece the standards of living remain high (and thus all indicators described before) despite the recent crisis. I believe, that unless someone explain this, the RELATIVELY wording should go. Thanks. 178.128.107.194 (talk) 15:55, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 October 2014

Greece is strategically located at the crossroads of Europe, Asia and Africa. It also shares land borders with Albania to the northwest, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and Bulgaria to the north and Turkey to the northeast. Notis7 (talk) 15:33, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. -- ferret (talk) 18:21, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Religion in Greece

Section II, Article 3, page 18 of the the Constitution of Greece states that "The prevailing religion in Greece is that of the Eastern Orthodox Church of Christ." It does not say the "Orthodox Christian faith", as User:Dr.K. reverted back to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreas11213 (talk • contribs)

@Andreas11213: Thank you for supplying the quotation. This helped me verify your edit and also add an inline source. Δρ.Κ. ^{λόγοςπράξις} 17:14, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 10 October 2014

Coolmaze123459 (talk) 13:27, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 14:01, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2014

There is a mistake in the following phrase of the Wikipedia document for GREECE. This is the existing phrase: "Crete is the largest and most populous island; Euboea, separated from the mainland by the 60m-wide Euripus Strait, is the second largest, followed by Rhodes and Lesbos."

This is the correct phrase which must replace the existing one: "Crete is the largest and most populous island; Euboea, separated from the mainland by the 60m-wide Euripus Strait, is the second largest, followed by Lesvos (3rd) and Rhodes'Bold text'." 2.86.206.212 (talk) 15:57, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for pointing that out - Arjayay (talk) 16:31, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Distomo massacre picture

The picture tagged as Distomo massacre memorial, is in fact a Greek Resistance monument. It was raised in memorial of the execution of 110 ELAS prisoners and 24 civilians by the Axis occupation forces, a different incident from that of the Distomo massacre. It is placed in Karakolithos a location nearby Tsoukalades and not in Distomo. Some pictures of the Distomo massacre memorial can be seen here, while there pictures of Karakolithos here. Both picture sets are from the official page of the Distomo-Arachova-Antikyra municipality. We should either change tha tag of the picture, replace it with a correct Distomo memorial picture or completely remove it. Any sugestions? Hansi667 (talk) 12:08, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Good notice.Alexikoua (talk) 18:28, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 November 2014

I would like the last paragraph of the introduction changed

from

Greece is a democratic developed country with an advanced high-income economy, a high quality of life and a very high Human Development Index. Greece is a founding member of the United Nations, was the 10th member to join the EEC (European Economic Community) as EU was called in 1981 (and the eurozone since 2001) and is also a member of numerous other international institutions, including the Council of Europe, NATO, OECD, OSCE and the WTO. Greece's economy is also the largest in the Balkans, where Greece is an important regional investor.

to

Greece is a democratic and developed country with an advanced high-income economy and very high standard of living. A founding member of the United Nations, Greece was the tenth country to join the European Communities (precursor to the EU) and has been part of the Eurozone since 2001. The nation is also a member of numerous other international institutions including the Council of Europe, NATO, OECD, OSCE and the WTO. Greece has the largest economy in the Balkan Peninsula, making it ninth in the Eurozone and 43rd in the world.

Jonathan'sCat (talk) 15:58, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

 Done Rewrite was clearer, and the 'high quality of life' wasn't explained before, so removed. Amelie poulain (talk) 15:50, 18 November 2014 (UTC)