Talk:Turkish Cypriots/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Delete?

Khoikhoi,i really cant believe that you didnt errase this...

-Inanna-

Oh, thanks for reminding me! --Khoikhoi 20:35, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Your greek friends(who hates you more than everything) tried this by bloody way.However that was a flop...Why do you hate Turks so much? What have they done to you?

-Inanna-

Please cite sources for population numbers. If not they will be erased.

I don't have any Greek friends, actually. I don't know who this person is. And I never said that I hated Turks, I said the stuff that you and Hybridlily do makes me want to. --Khoikhoi 02:49, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Inanna has provided the source which below me. The Turkish Cypriots are numerous in the UK alone the estimate is around 200,000 - 300,000.

This website http://www.bbc.co.uk/voices/multilingual/turkish.shtml says, "An estimated 100,000 Turkish nationals and 130,000 nationals of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus currently live in the UK. These figures, however, do not include the much larger numbers of Turkish speakers who have been born or have obtained British nationality." The figures here DO NOT include Turkish Cypriots who have British Passports (and many of them do) DivineIntervention 23:53, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[[1]]

I have already showed that resource.I cant talk about Hybridlily but what did i say so that you hate?

-Inanna-

Your source is just an article that doesn't explain where these figures come from. 500,000 Turkish Cypriots in Turkey is considerably higher than even the most Malthusian projections of population growth in Turkish Cyprus. And 200,000 in the UK appears to be an overall group including Turks from Turkey and Cyprus. These figures don't make any sense and you need a source that shows a census or something and not just an article that doesn't even cite where the numbers come from. I could write that there are 1 billion Americans, but no one is going to believe me without some census information. And if we're counting Turkish Cypriots as a separate group from Turks in Turkey (something I think is pointless), then the statistics on the Turkish people page need to be changed as well. Tombseye 23:21, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Whats with the ethnic groups table ??

- This is ridiculous. Why is there an ethnic groups table on this article ? - Turkish Cypriots are a subdivision of Turks. - - While you're at it, why dont you create a "Turks from Konya" or a "Turks from Izmir" page with some population stats ?User:Mrent

Mrent is "sockpuppet" of khoikhoi! Be rescpectful what did you say at first... -Inanna-

Mrent the Turkish Cypriot people are different from mainland (Anatolian) Turks only someone who lacks any knowledge on the Turks would make a statement like that. DivineIntervention 19:58, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Please, Wikipedia has no personal attacks policy. --Khoikhoi 21:54, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that Turkish Cypriots are counted on the Turkish people page as well. And the statistics sound extremely high. The entire population of Cyprus is nowhere near the figures given. Half a million in Turkey alone? If these figures are accurate, then some references are in order as I haven't seen these numbers before. Tombseye 23:14, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, im khoikhoi alright. Thats why he keeps on reverting my edits on the Turkish people article. Geez *roll eyes* It's not a matter of being anti-Turk. Its a matter of FACT. It's beyond ridiculous to put in population stats for Turkish Cypriots. Are the 500,000 "Turkish Cypriots" living in Turkey distinct from the other Turks over there ? Hmmm, now why did you edit my comments on the talk page ? Dont like any dissent do ya ? User:Mrent

Anyway,so you are Turkish,right? You give me that's answer then i will explain you...

-Inanna-

Huh ? What has my ethnicity got to do with the issue at hand ? Please make your case for the inclusion of population stats. User:Mrent

I dont have to make an explanition to you...

-Inanna-

For my Turkish Friends:

Bu sayfayı hazırlamamda ki neden,bizim bir zamanlar adada çoğunluk olduğumuzu göstermek içindir.Amacım kesinlikle bölücülük yapmak değil,tam tersine bazılarının haksız propagandasını yok etmektir.

Saygılar...

-Inanna-

Population of Turkish Cypriots

3/4 of world jews are diaspora.1/4 of world armenians are diaspora.There are 85 million irish people in the world but only 5 million irish people are living in ireland.So what's wrong?

-Inanna-

pfffff...another ridiculous claim about the population of turks(this time about the subvision of turkish-cypriots)...and guess what: is was made again by Inanna!!! don't u think that if there were half a million turkish cypriots in turkey,the turkish government would move them to colonise the occupied northern part of the island,instead of using anatolian turks for this purpose?in this way,turkey would not have violeted the Geneva Treaty and would not have commited a crime of war...

Turkey was guaranteer of cyprus.It was right of her.You shouldnt have done terrorism against us...What can you do Turkey? Turkey can smash you as a bug, baby.We have migrated to important states.We are 500,000 in Turkey.I am a Turkish-Cypriots in Turkey as well.We have invested on everything and became very powerfull in Turkey.We have entered politics as well.There are 200,000 greek cypriots in UK also.But UK only does whatever we want, not yours.Soon we will be recognized israel and USA as well.I am sorry for you, greek! You should stop crying...

-Inanna- to unknown user

I am not crying inanna...although u would be happy to see a greek crying,i will not do u this favour!!!what i simply said is that u are saying nonsense,and that there is no possible way that there can be half a million turkish cypriots in turkey...only if turkish cypriot women were giving birth to children in rabbits' rate,u could achive that:p...stop falsifing the facts!also,keep your nationalistic feeling for stormfront forum and not for wikipedia.last but not least,wait to see about the future and do not pretent to be a diplomat or prophet of any kind!and freeeeeeeeeeee your mind!

I am going to do it like this. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Turkish_Cypriot&oldid=36041586

So please stop khoikhoi's propagandas...

Could you keep the table in your revision? I like having the table on the side, it helps add color to the article instead of just black and white text. --Kotjze 22:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I support the table but khoikhoi wants to errase...

-Inanna-

okay,go ahead!change it once more...it will be soon changed again in an accurate base...I guess u either do not know what truth is or u just cannot stand it...!the numbers about the population are wrong!can't u get it?it is not possible in any way!(perhaps only in the dream that u are living in)

I changed the population figures again,and they shall remane like that till u will show some accurate and reliable sources.if u post again population figure for the turkish cypriots in turkey,i will start a topic in turkey's discussion page and be sure that i will manage to put this figure as separate in the population table of turkey itself!no personal offenses,no nationalistic feelings...it is just NOT possible to exist so many turkish cypriots in turkey! i am not Khoikhoi,but the one that u called 'greko'.

differences between Turkish Cypriots and Turks

"Turkish Cypriots view themselves different from mainland Turks, reasons for this include, the Turkish Cypriots say that mainland Turks have lost many aspects of Ottoman Turkish (due to language loans from other languages) as well as distinct cultural differences."

This sentence added by an anonymous user has just been suppressed, but it seems quite plausible to me as Turkish Cypriots were already separated from their mainland brethren at the time of Atatürk's cultural revolution. On the contrary, fantasy numbers of Turkish Cypriots in the world shouldn't be included in the article, it is simply not possibly accurate from a demographics point of view. It would be wiser to make a table with the successive ethnic results of the Cyprus censuses. Pylambert 19:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

It was originally added by User:DivineIntervention. The reason why it re-appeared is because the anon was reverting to a version a few weeks back. Inanna removed the sentence because she says it's not true. She is a Turkish Cypriot by the way. --Khoikhoi 19:48, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Ataturk mentioned the importance of cyprus for Turkey.Cyprus was rent by England 1878.Then England occupied it illegaly.Because Cyprus has a very big geopolitic importance.Englishmen still cant give up their bases in Cyprus.Imperialist barbarians created rebellions in New founded republic(Turkey).Because we would save our people in north iraq and they should have done something.Even spent money to us not to attack them.So he couldnt liberate cyprus.Besides, Cyprus is a rich island.It was so in all history.Phonecians and Real Greeks had founded trade colonies.Venetians had spent thousands of golds for rent from Ottoman Empire.Cyprus is still rich.Both regions.Go to north! There is embargo by UN but north cyprus has the highest mobile phone percentage in the world.1 automobile per 2 people and this is same with france.All taxis are mercedes...etc. And most people doesnt work.South cyprus is rich region as well.It doesnt seen by out but it's so.Even they look down to greeks in greece.

Note: Turkish Cypriots dont view themselves different from mainland Turks.Greek Cypriots do that.Dont try to create provacations between us.

-Inanna-

u are wrong innana,once more....Cypriot greeks see themselves different from mainland greeks only in a regional aspect.in the same ways that cretans and epirotes feel a bit different from peloponnesians or macedonians or thessalians.however u may be true about the turkish cypriots,since the vast majority of them are colonists from mainland turkey,that arrived in the island after 1974.by the way,your number of turkish cypriots in turkey is wrong...But since u are listing it,u should change the demographics of turkey as well:list them seperately from the other turks. --Hectorian 11:41, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Change in the demographics

i decided to change the numbers of the turkish cypriots,cause according to the most sources,200000 people is the whole population of the occupied northern territory,and not the population of the turkish cypriots alone. i have also deleted the number of turkish cypriots in turkey for 3 reasons: 1.there is no need to refear to turkish cypriots in turkey,unless they are considered a separate ethnic group.2.because the number 500000 can in no way be considered as accurate,even if we accept that the turkish cypriots in turkey have had the highest birth rates in the world during the past 100 years!and 3.because this number is based in a pro-turkish cypriot webpage with obvious refearances on irrentistic views.if it is accurate,i would like to see more sources that mention the same number,before i see the article been reversed to the former version again.

here are some references that state the number of turkish cypriots in cyprus(on of them is the CIA world fact book that is considered reliable from the Wikipedia):[2] [3]--Hectorian 15:56, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

i have changed the name South Cyprus with the name Republic of Cyprus,simply because this is the officially and internationally recognised name of the state.--Hectorian 23:25, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

The stats

Inanna, what are you doing [4]? Where is the source for all this? Of course, if the previous figures aren't sourced either, then they should go as well. Let's all cite our sources, so that we can finally agree on accurate figures. If there are no sources, then that sentence should be removed per WP:V. --Latinus (talk (el:)) 01:02, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Here's Inanna's source. Here are Hectorian's sources: [5] [6]. --Khoikhoi 01:06, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Inanna, sorry. Your "source" is inadmissable due to the fact that that we require reliable sources. Websites that include the phrase "Greek propaganda" are far from it. My problem is that I cannot find the stats for outside Cyprus in Hectorian's sources. --Latinus (talk (el:)) 01:15, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

It should be noted though that Inanna's source is the Public Information Office of the TRNC. While it is not a reliable source (ie take what they say with a pinch of salt), they are an important voice, so their "estimates" should be mentioned and be attributed to them, and not present them as statements of fact. Something like According to the Public Information Office of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus there are X Turkish Cypriots in.... --Latinus (talk (el:)) 01:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I have to go right now - would you be able to do it? Thanks. --Khoikhoi 01:27, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

honestly i have not found a source claiming accurately 100000 turkish cypriots in britain.but what i did found are sites like this one [7], that say that there are 80000 (or somewhere around that number) turks in the united kingdom.i know that most turks in the UK are turkish cypriots,so i decided to change the previous number(i know,i was probably wrong since it does not state clearly that they all are turkish cypriots),but in any case it must be closer to the real number than Inanna's edit.as for the turkish cypriots in other parts of the world,i changed nothing,apart from turkey cause they do not form a distinct ethnic group there,and cause there no sources about a specific number.of course,there is Inanna's source,but in no way can it be true,cause it is against all calculations and population projections ever created!!!unless someone believes that a group of people can grow up 20 times in population within a single century...!--Hectorian 01:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Hectorian's resource is a greek web-site and i didnt understand what he is trying to show by CIA's web-site.Turkish-Cypriots didnt have a high birth rate.Turks were majority in cyprus and we are not talking about citizens.We are talking about a nation.We cant expect honesty from a nation who did genocide against Turkish Cypriots.You are the last people who should talk about this issue...! Inanna 19:09, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Hectorian said:

"that a group of people can grow up 20 times in population within a single century"

Where did you get this calculation? Inanna 20:22, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

We really need a neutral source here - one that is not Greek nor Turkish. --Khoikhoi 22:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

yes,the first site is a greek one.but also the site u based your number is a turkish one.i will agree with Khoikhoi that a neutral source is needed here.the CIA source is considered neutral by the Wikipedia.what i am trying to show with this,is that the CIA world factbook says that turks are 18% out of a population of c.780000.that makes a number of 140000.the number u provided talks only about turkis cypriots,although CIA is talking about turkish(in general).perhaps cia includes both the colonists and the 40000 troops from mainland turkey.so,your number of 200000 is totally fake.it is another thing to say 'turkish nation' and another thing 'tyrkish cypriots'.u cited it as 'turkish cypriots' this is why i reverted it.turks were never a majority in cyprus.only one person had said it in the past(Turkish Cypriot-'In the eighteenth century, the British consul in Syria believed that the Turkish population on the island outnumbered the Greek population by a ratio of two to one. According to his estimates, the Greek Cypriots numbered 20,000 and the Turkish population around 60,000. Most historians do not accept his estimate, however.'),and there has never been another source to support his calculation.on the contrary,all the rest historians,etc have said that greeks were the majority in the island.my calculation about:"that a group of people can grow up 20 times in population within a single century",came from the article Turkish Cypriots that says: ' By the time of the first British census of the island in 1881, Greek Cypriots numbered 140,000 and Turkish Cypriots 42,638. '.if we accept your assumption of 937000 turkish cypriots today(!),this means an increase 21.97 times,within 120 years.it is just not possible...Lastly,i am signed in Wikipedia as Hectorian,and not as the President of Greece...so,do not generalise your anti-greek feelings and do not show your racism just cause u did not like something that a greek wrote.and if u wanna talk about genocides,i can provide u with 1000s of links that accuse turkey...--Hectorian 00:44, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

CIA's numbers about population is wrong.It says 69 millions for Turkey's population.It was so in 2001.Same CIA says %20 of Turkey is kurdish which is compeletly wrong.It doesnt say azeris,persians,arabs,georgians,lazs,tatars,...and showing wrong numbers about Turkey's economy.Anyway, you can see the population of all Cyprus here [8] .You can go and see if it's fake or not.Besides, there is no colonists.They are citizens of TRNC.Turks were majority in Cyprus.We have ruled the all island for 500 years...

Numbers of Turkish Cypriots:

After England occupied the cyprus illegally, a right was given to Turkish Cypriots."If Turkish cypriots flee to Turkey in one year, they would be able to Turkish citizens.If they prefer to stay, they would be british citizens".Half of Turkish Cypriots had fled to Turkey.Then, other half of them had fled to England(some greeks cypriots also).Rest of the Turkish cypriots fled to UK and Australia by time due to oppressions of greeks.So our population didnt grow 20 times...We cant be better racist than you.Crimes of greece are obvisous.Turkey didnt do any genocide.All brutal states whose history full of genocides are hiding behind this lie like france,russia,germany,greece,south cyprus...etc.Besides those "genocide" liars' like armenians and new touts(greeks,assyrians,chaldeans who i have just heard) target is steal indemnity money from Turkey.We have lost almost %40 of our population due to orthodox terrorism...Inanna 12:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

By the way greek cypriots view themselves diffrent from mainland greeks(but not as much as cretians).They look down to you.You can ask that to workers who are from greece in cyprus.They remember you when the things get difficult with Turks...Inanna 12:59, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

U claim that the CIA source is false.i do not think that it is right either,but since it is considered as a 'reliable source' by the Wikipedia,u HAVE to accept it!otherwise,u much change all the facts that derive from that.the link u provided about the population of cuprus says the total population of the island.it does not say how many of them are greeks of turks.but apparently u accept the CIA number for the greek-cypriots,and claim all the rest of World Gazetter for the turkish-cypriots.maybe u are right that the kurds are not as many as 20% of turkey,cause i have seen statistics that they are even more(up to 25%).the minimal number,which probably pleases u more,i am sure that comes from the turkish government.but allow me(and all the free thinking people of the world)not to believe the statistics of a state like turkey about its minority,cause till 1999 the kurds did not even exist for turkey!!!so,the CIA world factbook may be the best source to be used.and although,as u said,it doesn't count tatars etc,cause no other minority group is allowed to exist in 'democratic' turkey,no other one(apart from the diminishing greek,armenian,jewish,and recently kurdish)is recognised,and USA is an ally of turkey.if u want a further ethnic breakdown of turkey,look in other sites. according to the Geneva Treaty(and turkey has signed that too)the population tranfer in an illegally occupied area is a crime of war.the TRNC pseudo-state,has given citizenship for all the colonists,but it is itself non recognised by any other nation than turkey alone.the colonists are anatolian turks with illegal(internationally speaking) TRNC citezenship.turks were NEVER majority in cyprus...u have not provided such a link and i bet u cannot cite it in reliable sources.england did not occupy cyprus illegally,but was given to it by the ottoman empire in 1881 after the Treaty of Berlin(read some history before editting).and about their right to emmigrate to turkey after that,i am trying to understand your way of thinking:let me guess:when anatolian turks conquered cyprus and settled there,became turkish-cypriots...then,after 3 centuries,these turkish-cypriots-former anatolian turks,emmigratted to mainland turkey...and after 125 years their descendants are what?turkish cypriots?or anatolian turks?and why?am i the only one who sees irrelevancy in what u say?i guess not!u have not even provided a reliable source for the turkish-cypriot population in UK,although u claim they immigrated there.i am sure they did!but better provide a neutral source for their population.lol...orthodox terrorism!what is that?an Inanna's invention?your mind is shut...u are blind to see...u believe that the greeks,the armenians,the chaldeans,the assyrians,the kurds,the french,the russians are bad and evil,and only turks are right...it is just soooo pathetic... lastly,u are not gonna tell me what the greek-cypriots feel for me and the rest greeks...i have many greek-cypriots friends in my university...i see them every day...i know better...:)--Hectorian 18:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, i can guess who you are exactly but anyway...You can see the population of "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus" in world gazetter.

We have started to broadcast in Bosniak Language.Then Bosniaks demured that.They said "We are not minority, we are the part of great Turkey".You greek brains try to seperate Turkey with those propagandas but we have a difference.We see all of them same with us.No discrimination.If we wanted to count nations of Turkey, we couldn't find any solution.Our ex-president-Turgut Özal-was a kurd.Tayyip Erdoğan who is the president of Turkey at the moment is georgian origin.Abdullah Gül who is minister of foreign affairs of Turkey, mother is armenian and father is arabic.Elvan Abeylegesse who raced for Turkey in olympics is ethiopian."Sefarad" is a jewish boyband who will race for Turkey in Eurovision next year.Even greeks and armenians call themselves as "Turk".Do you know why? Becasue we accept everyone to our society.What democrasy you are talking about?! Democrasy doesnt mean to hinder successful albanian students or force people to change their names and religions.Democrasy doesnt mean expell 110,000 Turks from their homes,not to give them driving licences or ban them from everything.Democrasy doesnt mean co-operate with Nazis for massacring of Jews(moreover, we saved the jews in rhodos)...Learn what is mean democrasy at first, then come and talk...

Killing innocent people is more crime of war than population transfer.Besides, nobody had to go anywhere.Some greeks in north and Turks in south prefered to stay.Recognize or not.We are a state in cyprus.Azerbaijan and some african countries recognized.United Kingdom recognized also.I wont learn history from you.England leased cyprus form Ottoman Empire at first.Then they occupied the island illegally when Ottoman Empire was in war...

Let's see orthodox terrorism;

Bulgarians had killed 2-3 mililon Turks during the balkans wars.Armenians had killed 2 million muslims(Turks and mostly Kurds) in the eastern Anatolia.Serbs had killed(and still killing) hundred thousands of Bosniaks,Albanians and some croatians.Greeks had killed 1 million Turks.Ukrainians killed and forced to migrate thousands of Crimean Tatars(who lives in Turkey today).I wont talk about what russians did.Russians are already most evil people on the world.They killed millions of Turks, Jews, Chechens, and others...

France had killed 1,5 million people in algeria.Even UN wanted to stop that brutality but they answered this: "The only way not to shed blood is, there wouldn't be any blood to be sheded).NO COMMENT! Not only these.They had killed 1 million people in vietnam...and others.Germans killed millions of jews and namibians.Spaniards had killed millions of people in new world.Italians had killed more than 200,000 people in Libya and Ethiopia...All these countries recognized the so-called armenian genocide.HOW STRANGE?!

South Cyprus is not as developed as North for sure.There is only 1 university in south and they are going to other countries for study.Of course they will behave so diffrent to you.We have a saying in here: "Say 'Uncle' to 'Bear' until cross the bridge".Same tactique...Inanna 00:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Inanna, if you think that I am Hectorian as you said in your edit summary you are wrong. Please don't make accusations like these. I'm not Greek, I'm Jewish. --Khoikhoi 00:33, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I didnt mention anything about you.A greek was writing a lot of things in my talkpage(as you know) without "username".I think he was hectorian...Inanna 01:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that was Hectorian before he got a user name. Sorry about accusing you. --Khoikhoi 01:18, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Doesnt matter...Inanna 01:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes,it was me who had talked to u in your talking page,before i got an account.i have no problem in admitting that!and as a matter of fact,i signed some of may previous edits when i created my account(hmmm...although i am not sure if it is alright with wikipedia policies).but i guess i have not signed them all...So,Inanna,the edits in your talk page that have many 1.,2.,3.,4.... in the beginning are mine.

this is what i mean about turkey...u said it in the beginning...'great turkey'...pfff...the turks are still thinking of the ottoman empire...u should get over this idea of claiming all the muslims in europe.turkey is not their protector!i know about the origins of the high officials that u said,and i really doubt if they would be so successful in 'democratic' turkey,if they spoke the language of their ancestors and if they were not muslims.i did not get where the number 110000 refears to,but if u mean the people in western thraki,i have to remind u that they still live there,and were not expelled as the greeks in Constantinoupoli.it was turkey who violated the Lauzanne Treaty in this case....u have to admit it.

greece was the 2nd european country(after france) to give citizenship to the jews,and their faith was respected.do u want me to remind u that the jews in turkey(the followers of Levi) were forced to convert to islam?or u did not know that?greece was under triple occupation(german,italian,bulgarian) in world war II...u cannot accuse the greeks for what happened to the greek jews.there are many greeks (archibishop Damaskinos,former mayor of athens Evert,etc) whose names are in the holocaust monument in israel as all people who helped the jews in the 2nd world war.i am sure that Khoikhoi,who is jew,can probably enlighten u.ohhh,and about the jews of rhodes:what on earth u think u did for them?the dodecanese was an italian colony in that time...

i am refearing to the ottoman census in the early 1900s that shows 2.5 mil greeks in anatolia,and to the greek census after population transfer that shows 1.2 mil asia minor greeks in greece.their is a missing 1.3 mil greeks after the graeco-turkish war.what is your source for the so many 'dead' turks cause of the 'orthodox terrorism'?the united states had accused serbia for killing 200000 albanians before bombing it in 1999.we all know it was a lie now!no mass graves were found and no evidence to support this number.why the russians are the most evil?cause they killed turks and muslims?what are turks and muslims?more people that the other people?russians committed crimes as all did.they are not more evil than the others...i am not saying that no turk died in the balkan wars...people die in wars u know...but u have to acknowledge that genocide is a different thing from that.

it is not strange that these countries recognised the armenian genocide.the countries u said are by far more democratic than turkey and admit what they have done in the past.they even have laws against those who deny that!turkey keeps on denying everything...even when there is proof...

'Cyprus was placed under British control on 4 June 1878 as a result of the Cyprus Convention, which granted control of the island to Britain in return for British support of the Ottoman Empire in the Russian-Turkish War.'...check this out [[9]]...the UK never recognised TRNC...this 'country' is recognised only by turkey.the UN have asked twice turkey to withdraw the troops.azerbaijan just made trade agreements,and will probably do not dare to offially recognise it(for fear that greece may recognise Nagorno Karabach)...give me link about the african states that have recognised TRNC.it seems interested,if true!

i am bored in reverting the page and the numbers of turkish-cypriots.but i will do it again,if u do not provide a neutral and reliable source for that.i have a source saying that there are 500000 greek-cypriots in UK,but i will not edit it,cause it is not a neutral one.we will either base our edits on reliable sources,or the cyprus related articles will be a mess...it is not a threat...but please show facts!--Hectorian 10:45, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

1. Of course we are.That's the only common way between us and we'll use it.We were occupied serbia by NATO.Albania is "too close ally" Turkey[10] and we are training their army and spend %10 of their military expenditures.Just as Russia-Armenia, USA-Israel, EU-Greece.Besides, we have 1 naval and 1 air base in Albania to keep the region under control.Turkey has one of the most powerful militaries in the world.There are a lot of "Turkish Colleges" in Balkans, Russia, Africa,...etc.

2. 50,000 Turks were expelled from islands and 60,000 Turks were expelled from Western-Trakya.They had very bad standards until EU.They still have just as other etnic groups in greece.Greece was warned hundreds of times about that but you are the "spoiled child of europe" as we call you.And I am sure they wont be so harsh against their puppet.

3. Really?! So why there are just 4,000 Jews in greece.I asked a greek at once about why you hate jews so much and he said that..."Dont you hate"? Everyone knows very well your opinions about jews to very well.His name was "Sabetay Sevi" and it looks you know nothing about him and "Sabetays".

Sabetay Sevi was a crazy man and he was supposing himself a messiah.He was washing brains of people(mostly Turks) and provoking against Ottoman Empire.He and his followers was started a riot.Then he was sent to law court and given two alternatives.If he wouldn't give up his claims, he would be killed or he would be muslim and forgiven.However he adopted islam but he became jewish again(i can't write the all story now).Then he exiled to Albania...We didnt burnt them alive as Frenchs and Spaniards and they did that without reason.

If you want to learn what did Turks do for Jews in rodos, go to jewish museum in New York then.

4. Can i see that your Ottoman Census? But believe me i know ottoman archieve better than you.There were 1,2 million greek orthodox people whose 200,000 were original Turks.You can see my sources about your genocides against Turks in Izmir and Ankara.Russians always considered Turks as threat for them.Because they were minority in our homelands.All slavs spread world from poland.They should have killed all the non-slavs in this are and millions of Turks were killed to be able to majority just as armenians did.Have you never heard "Ivan the Teribble" or "Joseph Stalin"? They forced to flee and killed a lot of Khazarian-Turks who had adopted judaism also.All world knows the cruelty of russians.Even "google" decribed them "evil people".

I know the diffrence between war and genocide.I show respect the war which is done for liberty but genocide cannot be acceptable.

No they dont admit.That's why they are hiding behind the lie of armenian genocide.So why dont you recognize the Turkish Genocides? Can i see the real proofs about your so-called armenian genocide? Only notebooks of some adventurers?

5. Jack Straw visited TRNC's president.That means recognition.Azerbaijan worries about greece? So what are you waiting for? If you recognize the occupied are of azerbaijan so you have to recognize TRNC also.Why we coerced them so much for this? There is already not a state.Armenia only occupied there.South Cyprus threated Az. about Karabağ but they cant do anything.Even if they recognize, they wont go there because Turkey's air-space is closed for them.I cant find a link about african countries now but they did.We promised them to grant scholarships in Turkish-Cypriot universitites.

6. You can show whatever you want in greek-cypriots page.That's none of my affair but i will never permit your propaganadas in this page. Inanna 21:42, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

1.u seem to be happy that u occupy a foreign land far away from u...that's so pathetic...!

2.western thraki is a poor area of greece.noone was expelled from there,but many people migratted to germany and other countries in the 60s and 70s...and most of them were greeks,since greeks are the majority there...many greeks from all over greece emmigratted in the past cause of bad life standards when greece was not part of EU.we are a member state of EU...if u want to search for puppet states,look at the TRNC...

3.i guess u have understood nothing of what i said:the germans killed many jews during their occupation of greece.but this has nothing to to with the greeks,cause we were under foreign occupation!!!is that so hard for u to understand it?and something more:stop generalising what a greek told u...it was his personal opinion...Believe me,u wouldn't like me to characterize the turks according to what u post here!

yes,of course!they asked sabbatay levi to become a muslim,and then been forgiven!cause otherwise,they could not forgive a jew!!!and u call this 'good attitude towards the jews'?convert or die?:0....pfff medieval practices...

4.stalin killed millions of people,but i guess u condider turks to be the only who can be named people...!u should also have in mind that stalin and russians are not the same...stalin was a dictator,if u have ever heard about him...And about the armenian genocide,there are 1000s of documents in many sites on the net...U can find them if u open your eyes.instead of asking why no state has ever recognised a 'turkish genocide',better ask yourself if there was any thing like 'turkish genocide'.noone can recognise something that never happened...

5.well...the UK officially says that there is no state like TRNC,and officially recognises only the Republic of Cyprus.for EU,the northern part is under turkish occupation...and it is occupation,cause how else could u name a country that has a foreign army that makes the 20% of its population?what would the UK be if it had 15 million german soldiers?and if u say that they are turks in 'turkish land',it is one for reason to say it is an OCCUPATION!i have no knowledge about any possible african country that may have recognised it...and honestly i cannot believe without seen facts...i searched a lot but found nothing!so,i guess u are wrong...

6.wikipedia is supposed to be an online encyclopedia,so,i will not post what i said in the greek cypriots article,but i will not let u play your propaganda games in any article. -Inanna-

i am telling u once for all: u will either provide reliable sources,or this article will be reverted every day till ETERNITY!am i asking too much?just reliable sources...this is what u were supposed to do from the beginning...--Hectorian 01:10, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Not problem for me...Inanna 00:52, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Protected

Don't know who is right or wrong but sort it here. Also read WP:3RR. If you get consensus then ask for it to be unprotected. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 08:56, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Please do not come to my talk page and ask me to make edits to page. I do not know which is the correct version I only protected it to stop the edit war. There needs to be discussion. Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:44, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Citing sources

Instead of asking the administrator to revert the article to your version,Inanna,it would be better to cite your sources(the neutral ones) here in order to come up with a solution.

remember:here we have to deal with an accuracy dispute of this specific article.so,if u have anything to say about the past,the armenian genocide,the greek minority in turkey,the Ecumenical Patriarch,the kurdish issue,etc etc,say it in the talk pages of the respective articles,or in my talk page if u wish.

Here are some sources that i have found:[11],CIA world factbook [12],a UK page [13],another neutral one [14],a governmental cypriot one(maybe not considered neutral,but it does not say anything different than the others)[15] and finally a page of the European Union [16].

I have found sources about the turkish cypriots in the UK varying from 80000-130000,but not even one about turkish cypriots in turkey. waiting for your reply,on this topic.do not force me to refer to other subjects here.--Hectorian 17:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Take out the cyprus.gov.cy one because it's almost a counterpart of Inanna's source. However, I think the other one's are good. So with these sources, what would the introduction look like? --Khoikhoi 18:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay.so,lets not take into account the cyprus.gov.cy one(although this makes no difference)...but since we said neutral sources,i have to be honest to that.

I would propose an introduction like:'turkish cypriots are inhabitants of cyprus whose ancestors settled in the island prior to 1974(as opposed to the anatolian turkish immigrants who have settled there in the past two decades).They form the second largest ethnic group of the island(after the greek cypriots) and they make up the 11% of the population.Many turkish cypriots have immigrated to a number of other countries during the past decades,and today their largest community lives in the United Kingdom(source).other centres of the turkish cypriot diaspora are:...'

we will have to choose the most reliable of the sources about their number in the UK,we will not refer to turkey,cause they are not a foreign community there and i have not found any reliable and neutral source about their number,and i haven't got any objection for the rest estimations...they seem to be right(but i will do some searching in case i can find something more or something different)--Hectorian 22:35, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[No Title]

"Greek Cypriot freedom fighters" (EOKA terrorists); 1974 Invasion by Turkey with NO mention that Generals from Greece were carrying out a coup at the time! What a selective lot of nonsense this page is - you people are the reason that Wikipedia has no credibility.

How can you have a page about Cypriot Turks with no mention whatsoever of the 100+ Turkish villages that were ethnically cleansed and pushed up into northern enclaves by Greek soldiers, police, EOKA terrorists and fanatics?

For anyone reading this who has a genuine interest, I recommend BBC Cyprus Timeline or CIA Factbook etc... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.12.20.66 (talk • contribs) 13:17, 24 February 2006.

Unprotecting

There's absolutely no recent discussion here. Unprotecting. --Tony Sidaway 16:41, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Hectorian

I don't care if I am stepping on your toe, that's why I directly edited the article without discussion, this article has no two sides to it, it is about Turkish Cypriots, there is no room for your demonizing of mainland Turks or naming EOKA butchers freedom fighters here. You change the article, I'll re-edit it; you get the page locked, then I'll edit articles related to Greek Cypriots, I'll make sure you are uncomfortable. Nobody mentioned any EOKA atrocities in this article except for the link given, you should be satisfied with that and just leave.--Kagan the Barbarian 14:52, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

My comment to this is on your talk-page.--Hectorian 16:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Khoikhoi

Why am I not suprised to see you.

"Emigration would have been higher in this period, had there not been pressure from the Turkish Cypriot leadership to remain in Cyprus and participate in building the new republic."

Give me sources for this. If you can't, it is just speculation and PPOV. Also why aren't EOKA atrocities and the civil unrest mentioned for reasoning the massive emigration of Cypriot Turks?

"Nearly 10,000 Turkish Cypriots who served in the security forces against EOKA activities during 1955-1961 left the island, mostly to Britain or to Australia with their families once the 1959-1960 Cyprus Agreements were signed and former Greek Cypriot freedom fighters began assuming high-level posts in the new government."

Once again sources. And why even mention the EOKA having posts in the new government if you aren't going to lead it to a relevant subject to this article?

"- After the Turkish invasion in 1974 with the subsequent occupation of the north and according to Turkish-Cypriot newspapers, over one third of Turkish Cypriots emigrated from the occupied area between 1974-1995 because of the economic and social deprivation which prevails there with concurrent expulsion of the Greek population. In addition, Turkey begun to move settlers from Anatolia in the island which reached around 115.000 (2001 figures), in violation to the Geneva Conventions Protocol of 1977, which considers it a war crime. As a result the Turkish Cypriots who remain are today outnumbered by the Turkish troops together with the colonists."

Look, I am not stupid. When a person ignorant about the subject reads this, he/she will assume Greek and Turkish Cypriots were getting along very well, then mainland Turks came, invaded and populated the island, causing social and economic deprivation. This is a travesty. If you want to mention the Turkish occupation then you have to write about EOKA atrocities and military coup as well, which gave Turkey a legitimate right for intervention as the guarantor. If you are going to mention economic and social problems in Northern CYprus then you have to write about the international embargo for 30 years.--Kagan the Barbarian 07:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed the first two paragraphs that you mentioned, due the the fact that they were POV and uncited, but the 3rd one is more complicated then that. Oh, btw, it's not a good idea to link to propaganda websites.

I suggest that instead of simply switching to the Turkish side, try to make the article more neutral. Why did you take out the part about the expulsion of the Greek population? --Khoikhoi 07:39, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

You never sleep, do you? I linked the website because you keep insisting on not mentioning anything about EOKA's activities and the civil unrest. It may be TC point of view but the photos speak for themselves.

If you want me to accept the article as NPoV, then the EOKA atrocities and military coup by the support of Greek junta has to be mentioned before Turkey's intervention; the coup gave Turkey a legal ground for intervention in the first place. Then I'll accept Turkey's violation of Geneva convention by occupying the North of the island mentioned. Let's write about the expulsion of GCs from the North, what about the TCs from the south? Are you sure you are neutral? Also the international embargo on Northern Cpprus has to be mentioned as well in order to reason the economic and social deprivation. Lastly, Turkish security forces needed to be used instead of troops and emigrants instead of colonists. They were granted citizenship by the TRNC government, whether they are recognized or not by the international community.--Kagan the Barbarian 08:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Must you start all your sentences with a personal attack? Please try to be civil here. I never said I want you to accept the article as NPOV. I said that you should add it in a way that isn't Turkish POV. Do you think you are neutral? --Khoikhoi 08:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I have a problem trusting in your good faith which prevents me from being nice to you. Anyway, now I only have a problem with the last paragraph. I'll make some changes to it and then we discuss until we find common ground.--Kagan the Barbarian 08:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok, sounds good. I have to sleep now. ;) Btw, just because you don't trust me doesn't mean you should make attacks like that. See WP:NPA. Good night. --Khoikhoi 08:30, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

There should be also mentioned that the military coup sponsored by the greek junta failed.this is not my POV,but the fact.the coup failed and the greek junta collapsed...everyone knows that.if it is not mentioned,it leads the readers to believe that the greeks are to be blamed for everything.maybe they are according to some people's POV,but i think we are trying to make the article NPOV...

Sorry Kagan the Barbarian but your last edits are not neutral at all but just an interpretation of the turkey's governmental position.let me see what i can spot in here:

1. 'EOKA-B took power in Cyprus with a military coup backed by the Greek junta':how many times have i got to say that the coup failed?!also,it was a coup against the elected president of cyprus,do not present it as if it was a coup against only the TCs.

2.'Turkish army intervened':it is also the turkish POV.the UN,EU,NATO call this an 'invasion'.and this is why the UN have voted twice for the withdrawl of the turkish troops.

3.'security forces': only the turks call the army like that.for all the rest is just the 'turkish troops' or the 'occupying forces'.

4.'settlers': according to my knowledge of english(and pls someone correct me if i am wrong),settler is the person who decides to settle in a place.the mainland turks in cyprus are colonists.if u call them 'settlers' u create a misunderstanding with what u said before 'over one third of Turkish Cypriots emigrated from the occupied area between 1974-1995 because of the economic and social deprivation'->if TCs emigrated cause of a number of serious reasons,how can someone believe that others choose to emigrate in their place?they were sponsored by the turkish government,so,they are colonists.

5.why u added again the population figures in the beginning of the article?don't u know that for this reason was the article protected?

i will not remove anything yet,nor i will make any change at the moment.i wanna see what the others have to say in order to make the article NPOV.i also wanna see reliable sources for the population figures,cause no matter how much i had asked for them in the past,i never received a decent reply...--Hectorian 14:50, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

1. It failed because of the military intervention by Turkish armed forces, I hear some Greeks believe it also triggered the fall of the junta regime in Greece as well. The military coup has to be mentioned since it was the main reason for Turkey's intervention. I wrote EOKA-B took power in Cyprus with a military coup, please tell me how it is not NPoV? Most of EOKA-B militans were responsible for the murders of TC civilians including infants, them taking power in Cyprus is of course an alert for Turkey to take action, it gives them a legitimate right for military intervention.

2. The occupation is illegal as I wrote before but the intervention was not. I repeat Turkey had the right to send troops to Cyprus to secure the wellfare of TCs and restore peace as the guarantor but not the right to stay there. That's why I left violation of Geneva convention there.

3. They are security forces for TCs and this is an article about TCs. If Turkish army refuses to withdraw after TCs demand it then they would be an occupying force for TCs. To call them occupiers in a TC article is saying they are there against TC will.

4. If you want to call Turkish settlers colonists, you have to show me sources that prove they are sponsored by the Turkish government. Otherwise it is just speculation. And why is it unbelievable some Anatolian Turks emigrating to Northern Cyprus by choice? I live in Izmir, most youngsters prefer to move to Istanbul because of better job opportunities yet Izmir nearly had 500,000 emigrants from Eastern Turkey in the last 5 years. It happens. Northern Cyprus is not starving or suffering, some leave there, some move there, depending on their expectations from life.

5. I didn't add any population figures.

Hopefully, we'll reach a NPoV on this.--Kagan the Barbarian 17:19, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I also have the feeling that eventually we will reach in a NPOV in here.Here is what i have to say for the above:

1.We are generally talking about 'the turksih invasion in cyprus' but in fact there were 2 invasions:on the 20tn July and on 14th August.the 2nd invasion took place after the greek junta had collapsed,after the restoration of the democracy in athens and after the failure of the coup d' etate in Cyprus.if u say that the coup was the reason that justifies the turkish invasion,u ommite the fact that the vast majority of cypriot land and the 000,000s people,was captured and expelled respectively after the failure of the coup.Maybe the military action of 20 july was justifiable,cause it meant to stop the civil unrest,but the greatest impact on cyprus came with the invasion of 14 august.after the invasion of 20th july the turkish forces occupied only the narrow strip between Kyrene and Nicosia.see the respective articles for more details or maybe cause(if) i have not made myself clear.it is NPOV mentioning EOKA-B in the way u did,cause afterall she did take power.i would propose the usage of something like 'the turkish troops landed on the island' in order to avoid the usage of the terms that reflect POV.

PS:the military regime in greece was in a steady rate of collapse from its early creation(1967)-the former King had attempted an anti-coup in 1968.on 17 November 1973 there was the uprising of the Polytechnic School of Athens-were the generals ordered shooting and moved troops in the university against unarmed students.this is what we celebrate every year on 17 November as the fall of junta(cause the most vital and free part of Hellenism-the students-demanded democracy).The cyprus events are known as 'The Cypriot Tragedy'(note: not greek-cypriot,but simply cypriot).Those greeks were right for what they told u,cause the turkish invasion was indeed the death of the greek junta,but it was not its illness:after the events in the Polytechnic School,the junta wanted to make something 'glorious',in order to stay in power,and the generals decided to incorporate cyprus in greece.

2.I am not sure if turkey had this right,since the UN and the other 2 quarantors do not recognise it.I am not aware of the articles of the Treaty of Guarantee.(perhaps u could help me if u have a link).

3.Maybe it would be better to say 'are considered security forces by the TCs'.cause if u just say 'security forces' u lead people to believe that the TCs are afraid of the GCs.Cyprus has a circa 10,000 national guard,not even an army!(many of whom are greek soldiers who would come back in greece,if the turksih army was about to leave from the north).not to mention that there are UN troops in the green line.so,the turkish military presence is used more like a sort of pressure to the GCs,than a 'security force'.but if the TCs regard it as such,i think it would be better if it was mentioned in the way that i said above.

4.Did the mainland turks buy their houses in northern cyprus?no.they were given to them by the turkish government in order to populate the area.so,they were sponsorned and that's why they should be called 'colonists'.

5.the population figures are obviously wrong for reasons that have been explained in all this page.that's why i think they should be removed.--Hectorian 19:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

1. So what do you want the reader to think when they read your version of the article? That Turks woke up one morning and decided to take 1/3 Cyprus for some action? At least we can write Turkey used the military coup in Cyprus as a pretext for intervention. I repeat this has to be mentioned for the sake of reasoning events.

2. As I said a bazillion times before, intervention legal, occupation not. There is a Wikipedia article about the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee.

3. Of course they are security force for TCs, what kind of a suggestion is that, do you consider the US army a Greek security force? Turkish forces are stationed there under the name of security, not to invade rest of the island.

4. These are speculations Hector. What you wrote may very well be true but there are also Turks who purchased houses on the island and settled there, just like some Brits did. Colonist is the last word we can use for those people; Israeli settlements in West Bank are illegal as well but they are regarded as settlers in the mass media. And while mentioning Turkish settlers, I left the violation of Geneva convention so people know it is illegal according to international laws. Be satisfied.

5. I have no information about the population thing so can't say anything about it except that I repeat I wasn't the one who added it.--Kagan the Barbarian 22:11, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

1.Of course it has to be mentioned!i never said the opposite.maybe what u said 'Turkey used the military coup in Cyprus as a pretext for intervention' would be neutral enough.btw,u should not say 'what i want people to believe when the reader reads this article'...If i wanted to pass my POV though this article,it would be much different!i am making proposals and not reverts or edits in order to make it NPOV.

2.i know the Wikipedia article about the 1960 Treaty of Guarantee,but it does not contain the articles...anyway...

3.what i said is to write 'are considered/regarded security forces by the turkish cupriots'.not to call them 'are considered/regarded occuping troops by the turkish cupriots'!but not to leave it as 'security forces' for the obvious reason that the TCs are not threatened by the GCs + there is also UN forces who would not allow an assumed greek attack.it is common sense...

4.so,there are both settlers and colonists.using both the words would be silly...so,maybe the word 'settlers' would be fine,but 'Geneva Conventions Protocol of 1977' should be in the form of an internal link,so that the readers can redirect.

DO NOT talk to me like 'Be satisfied'.It is your obligation to make an article NPOV(if u want to be objective),not mine obligation to thank u for this!!Keep your feelings towards me as Hector(ian) or the Greeks in general for yourself...cause I am not interested...

5.about the population tab.if there are reliable sources there should be cited,if not,these figures should be removed.--Hectorian 22:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I am getting bored of this. You want this article to stress the Turkish occupation in Northern Cyprus, I doubt you really care about its main object and subject that is Turkish Cypriots, that's why I am adding certain things so you stop complaining. I will make final changes as we talked and then come back whenever I feel interested again.--Kagan the Barbarian 10:24, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok done. I still think the conflict between Greek and Turkish Cypriots has to be mentioned in the article to some detail, though right now I don't have the time to do it. I want the opinions of other users on this.--Kagan the Barbarian 10:58, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

U can't understand it,do u?i did not complain,i proposed...i could as well make changes instead of talking.i do not care in changing anything of the main subject,that is Turkish Cypriots,cause i think it written well.all that i wanted was to use appropriate words concerning the Turkish occupation,words that would prevent future changes by any side.Now u have made the article quite good.U see,it is not hard to solve a problem if we talk!(with one exception:the population figures,that i will change now,according to what has been written in all the page).The conflict between GCs and TCs is mentioned in the article about the Cyprus conflict,but if u want to refear to it in further detail here,do so...(using always good language and avoiding words that would create tension).Btw,there is no need to make personal comments such as 'be satisfied','stop complaining'.u did that from the very first moment u saw i am greek.u'd better focus in what i said,NOT in which nation i belong.--Hectorian 12:07, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus

Isn't the article Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus the same? Why don't we unite them both? Danny-w 12:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. I didn't read it all. it's not. :-). Danny-w 12:47, 12 May 2006 (UTC)