Talk:Enosis

"Irredentist"
There are several problems with this page, not least the claim that the demand of the Greek population of Cyprus to unite with Greece –which was essentially anti-colonial at its very core– was "irredentist". I suggest you look the term up in dictionaries and Wikipedia's own page, because it does not apply to the case of Cyprus and describes something rather different. The population of Cyprus in its overwhelming majority (80-82%) was Greek. Inevitably, the anti-colonial sentiment and associated anti-colonial movement was naturally interlinked with the strong desire of the overwhelming majority of the population of the island who saw a unification with Greece as the natural outcome of self-determination. Greece did not actively "seek to reclaim lost territory" in the case of Cyprus, as it did for example in Smyrna. Greece simply supported the struggle and basic human right of Greek-Cypriots for self-determination. The 1974 coup d'etat was not carried out by the legitimate Greek or Cypriot governments, but by the illegitimate junta regime in Greece at the time, supported by a minority of Greek-Cypriot extremists/terrorists. Therefore, their condemnable actions cannot be considered as the diachronic official policy of Greece (or the legitimate government of Cyprus for that matter), simply because the Greek junta was an unelected, unconstitutional and illegitimate military regime, and because of that its leaders were later thrown in jail. Not only the 1974 coup d'etat was not supported by the majority of Cypriots (Greek and Turkish), but it was condemned and many Greek Cypriots died defending the legitimate government and constitution. The "irredentist" claim in the introduction and elsewhere therefore needs to be removed and the article needs to re-focus on the actual struggle of Cypriots for "enosis" and self-determination prior to the 1960 constitution and establishment of the Republic of Cyprus, rather than linked to a long history of unrelated or only marginally related events. The description of the struggle of Cypriot people for their basic human right for self-determination as "irredentist", is nothing more than a biased, colonialist-apologetic and pro-Turkish narrative that does not in this case accurately describe historical events.

46.251.117.65 (talk) 21:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Enosis is... meaning or political movement, or disrespect?
Coming here from Corfu, where "Enosis" is used as meaning "joining back with the larger Greece", using the word's general meaning "union".

It is difficult to see a cross-section of usages for this word. When one starts doing so one wonders why Enosis doesn't instead point to Greek football!
 * 822 site:en.wikipedia.org "Enosis"
 * 562 Enosis +"football"
 * 503 Enosis +"club"
 * 332 Enosis +"paralimni"
 * 276 Enosis -"football"
 * 238 "Enosis" -"club" -"football" -"paralimni"

To see non-football and non-Cypriot usages one has to use
 * 40 "Enosis" -"club" -"football" -"paralimni" -"cyprus" -"cypriot"

Now if you want to just point to the number of occurrences, to justify eclipsing the meaning to only one usage, fine, but then I'd say the article should be about football clubs or political parties.

I am disturbed that this article has become "owned" by one particular political movement, certain of their own overriding importance.

Look at a few articles, seeing how they use 'Enosis':
 * Cretan Revolt (1866–1869)
 * Macedonian Struggle
 * Euclides Kourtidis
 * Talk:Icaria
 * Theriso revolt

Look at how the word is used in these articles. Look at how the last article is linked to this article, which has very little to do with the Cretans struggle or the general subject.

One group has decided to throw away the 'meaning' of all previous struggles for Enosis, by any other Greeks, in favor of their own 'importance'. I see quite too much of people saying "that's old news, who cares about that old history". That is what is happening here.

That this article regarding a general term with much more meaning and history lacks balance is unfortunate. That it lacks respect is obvious. That one group of Greeks doesn't see that is a tragedy. 24.28.17.231 (talk) 21:38, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

RE : the Church proceeded to organize its own illegal referendum
The church organised a vote amongst Greek Cypriots to demonstrate to the British authorities and the world that they wanted union with Greece. Where are the sources to show that this was illegal ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by HelenOfOz (talk • contribs) 08:00, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 14:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Cyprus Section about Ioannis Kapodistrias
In the Inception of Cypriot enosis part of the Cyprus section it states: "In 1828, modern Greece’s first president Ioannis Kapodistrias, whose maternal ancestors were Greek Cypriots, ..."

There's nothing in the sources provided to make it clear that Kapodistrias maternal family originated from Cyprus; without prior knowledge of his mother, Adamantine Gonemis, the origin of her family won't be seen as relating to Kapodistrias, and the quotes don't do this any justice; there's only a mention of the Gonemis family but not Kapodistrias' relation, and not everyone can automatically link the two. Also, the reference to Epirus etc is not incorrect or completely out of context, but it seems a little off here; Epirus etc is not in Cyprus, but in Greece etc, which is where Gonemis' family migrated after Cyprus & Crete etc fell to Ottoman rule... and it still has nothing directly to do with linking that to Kapodistrias. Not everybody is an expert in the history of modern Greece, or Kapodistrias, or his immediate family, or his extended family...

These things could make this sentence come across as a possible fringe theory (or "theories") to the less knowledgable of us. That also by effect makes it suggestive.

I suggest that we include something about his mother, Adamantine Gonemis, to link that missing logic. The reference to Epirus could also do with better direction.

Also, "Greek Cypriots" wasn't a term that existed back then, nor can it be applied the same way it's applied to the current Greek Cypriot community of Cyprus. Then they would just be known as "Greeks that originated from the island of Cyprus".

Maybe we could instead say something along the lines of: "In 1828, modern Greece’s first president Ioannis Kapodistrias, whose maternal ancestors were from Cyprus[11][12] (his mother was Adamantine Gonemis of the Gonemis family, who originated from the island of Cyprus)..."?

Thoughts anyone? Nargothronde (talk) 03:37, 21 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The addition of details about Capodistria's mother to an article about "Enosis" is far too much undue detail. The given sources makes it clear that he had family roots from Cyprus, and that is all that is needed here. I do, however, agree that the use of the term "Greek Cypriots" is problematic. I suggest to change it to "whose maternal ancestors originated from Cyprus" and leave it at that. --T*U (talk) 12:56, 21 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm no expert on this area of history and I'd be grateful if someone could answer a question for me. Is it generally believed that Kapodistrias called for Cypriot enosis because of his family heritage? If it is then presumably we should make such a statement explicitly with an explicit citation to that effect. I can't tell whether this idea is supported by the sources already cited, as the full texts don't appear to be hyperlinked and I cannot read them. If this is the case then we could add a more explicit quote to that effect – if not, we probably need better sources.
 * On the other hand, if there are no WP:RELIABLE sources that make this claim about Kapodistrias' motivations then we clearly shouldn't make such a claim in the article. At the moment the text juxtaposes two statements ("...Kapodistrias, whose maternal ancestors were Greek Cypriots, called for union of Cyprus with Greece...") in such a way that causation is implied. This would qualify as WP:SYNTH if sources do not support that conclusion. It might be better just to remove the words "...whose maternal ancestors were Greek Cypriots..." from the article.
 * -- Polly Tunnel (talk) 13:45, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * You do seem to have a valid point. There is nothing about such motivation in Woodhouse's biography and I am sure also not in Crawley's article, which covers other themes. --T*U (talk) 16:12, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * As there has been no further discussion, I shall propose the deletion of the words "...whose maternal ancestors were Greek Cypriots..." and the two accompanying citations which support them. -- Polly Tunnel (talk) 12:19, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅ as no objections raised. -- Polly Tunnel (talk) 12:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Southern Italy
The movement advocating for the union of Southern Italy with Greece is marginal even among southern Italian separatists, making it a fringe of a fringe movement. It is an idea foreign to most southerners or Greeks, utterly irrelevant in Italian or Greek politics -past and present, unlike irredentism in Cyprus or the Ionian Islands-, and no different from a billion other amateurish fringe online political movements in Europe that rightfully are ignored on wikipedia due to a lack of encyclopedic notability. Why then does this objectively irrelevant minority movement get such a large section in an article that otherwise deals about issues that have been far more important to Greece in both their popular support and historical impact? 93.34.34.64 (talk) 22:09, 17 May 2024 (UTC)