User talk:E.A~enwiki/archive 1

RfC on Argyro
I put an RfC request for Argyrosargyrou. Feel free to contribute: Requests_for_comment/Argyrosargyrou

Old welcome msg
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Yu Ninjie 10:52, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

3RR
Hi E.A and Argyrosargyrou &mdash; I'd just like to remind you of one of Wikipedia's fundamental editing policies, the Three-revert rule. You have both broken this in your edit war at Cyprus dispute. I'd recommend you both calm down and use the Talk page available. You can also look at the guide-lines at Resolving disputes. Please note that continuing edit wars by reverting more than three times in 24 hours is a blockable offence. &mdash; Asbestos | Talk  19:58, 18 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi, firstly apologies for the anon edit, my PC has got a virus, have to access internet from safe mode, forgot to log in.


 * Thanks for your involvement, the reason i have had to relentlessy revert is because Argy edits have turned a relatively neutral article into a list of legal rulings with no analysis, insulting language to Turkish Cypriots and downright lies. He has made no compromises while i have reworded my edits to get him to stop reverting. He has discounted my sources (even though their the same as his!), he has listed a section of human right abuses by Turks, but refuses any wrongdoing was done unto Turks. I would be glad to be rid of this article, but it seems, with the exception of rather good anon edits today and Schnuder, that no one is interested in balancing and removing his insulting POV's.


 * I can't comment on the article at hand, knowing very little about it. What you could do, however, would be to list the article at Requests for comment (under Article content disputes), and place a notice in the article's talk page saying that you have done so. This should encourage other editors who know about the situation to discuss the article and try to reach some consensus on what should and what should not be in the article.
 * Whatever you do, though, you should try to stop reverting the article. An admin who sees that would be liable to block you immediately, even if your version of the article is more accurate. &mdash; Asbestos | Talk  21:20, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

One does not have to be in TRNC to sympathise
E.R., I like your comments. I'm trying to push across the Turkish Cypriot viewpoint in Wikipedia as well, though being careful to be as dispassionate as possible to avoid erasure. I'm an expatriate New Zealander now living in the USA, but I've been keeping a close watch on Cypriot developments since my teen years. The Greek Cypriots have a nerve saying that they are the injured party after pulling that coup attempt in '74. As far as I'm concerned, they got off easy. --Expatkiwi 23:51, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi, im glad there are people who sympathise with what Turkish Cypriots went through and take an interest. Its difficult finding people who can see beyond the 'official' Greek Cypriot line. People like Argy who aggresively deny any wrong doing to Turks are not uncommon, and its their ability to put down any claims of killing of Turks with a list of UN and ECHR rulings which makes Turkish Cypriots cause very difficult. Hopefully things will improve in coming years, though i doubt it. --E.A 00:20, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Don't be too despondent. Greek Cyprus lost a lot of credibility when they voted down the 2004 referendum, and despite a lot of outside pressures, the sovereignty of the TRNC has remained intact. The OIC has given a major diplomatic lift to TRNC and the United States has been showing more sympathy to the TRNC's United States representatives. If another referendum comes up and Greek Cyprus torpedoes it again (which I fully expect from Papadopaulos), then that will be the last straw and recognition from other states will be forthcoming. Expatkiwi 00:36, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

There certainly has been a shift in diplomatic circles in the perception of Papadopolous and the south, but so far its been mostly words. The OIC will not refer to TRNC, but simply as Cyprus Turkish State, Azerbaijan (who are ethnically Turks) promised recognition to TRNC if referendum failed and then broke their promise. I find it incredible that the EU let the South join in the first place, Papadopolous knows he has much more levereage in negotiations now than he did before. And his going to try and keep that advantage by making sure TRNC is still economically isolated come the next negotiations, which is why 1 year on there is still no aid or free trade. The EU is even willing to favour a 700,000 Greek Cypriots over 70 million Turks, by twisting Turkeys arm at last minute in December to recognise South Cyprus, and France and Austria among others will hold referendum on whether Turkey should join - something it hasnt done for any other EU candidate. And they wonder why nationalism is on the rise in Turkey.

But to be honest, i am against unification - TRNC will be flooded with Greek Cypriots and Turks would be minority in their own country. I also hope it doesnt turn out like the South and be a cheap holiday resort full of drunks. If TRNC got a fair degree of economic and political freedom i dont see why they should want to unify with South. --E.A 12:40, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

I try to be optimistic. I hope TRNC retains it's independence. And at least Nakhchivan recognizes TRNC.Expatkiwi 13:40, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

RFC on Cyprus dispute
I've placed a brief entry about this article on Requests for comment, in the hope of getting some new input. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:43, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

3RR block
I'm afraid I've had to block you as well as Argyrosargyrou for violating the three-revert rule on Cyprus dispute. The 3RR does not have any exceptions for enforcing consensus reached on a talk page, only for reverting simple vandalism. In future, when faced with that situation, please bring the edit war to the attention of other editors instead of trying to revert on your own. This has the effect of demonstrating to the other side and to the community that the other side's revert's go against consensus, and often has the effect of reducing confrontation between two individual users and calming the situation down. Please feel free to e-mail me if you wish to query the block. Proteus (Talk) 20:33, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

There's still hope


E.A., Despite the entrenched attitudes of people like Argyrosargyrou, there is still hope for TRNC. The Gambia is ready to formally recognize TRNC, and since that nation is not only a UN member, but a member of the Commonwealth, that's a double-black eye to the Greek Cypriot Government. Kazakhstan wants to establish cultural relations, and now the TRNC Ambassador in Ankara is getting visits from other ambassadors. Things are starting to look up. As far as I'm concerned, I've been contributing graphic artwork designs for the TRNC Representatives in Los Angeles and Munich. They say that they really appreciate my support and efforts, though I'm sorry that I can't do much more. Still, something is better than nothing, particularly for a good cause. --Expatkiwi (Talk) 10:10, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

That is excellent news, quite a big step, hopefully it might have a snowball effect and more countries decide to recognise TRNC. That Seal is great work too, i hope they adopt it. Turkish Cypriots need more people like yourself who are aware and supportive of their cause, Thanks again for your support, --E.A 18:33, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Argy strikes back
That guy Argyrosargyrou has been at it again. I've had to revise what he tried to do on the reference page Turkish Cypriot Genocide. That guy really is persistant.(Talk) 23:23, 28 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Added my keep --E.A 14:34, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Editing messages
First, please compose messages offline (on your computer) and then copy them to Wikipedia - every time you hit "Save page" to correct a one-character typo, it uses a lot of disk space, making a copy of the entire page. (Plus to which it's really irritating to keep seeing the "You have new messages" message.) You can use the "Show preview" button to make sure all the links work, etc. Second, please be careful in doing edits - this edit by you duplicated a huge chunk of text. I find it's always best to go into the history and do a diff after I commit an edit, and make sure it did what I thought it did. Third, please always sign your posts (with the Wiki special form ~ ), so we can see who they are from without checking the history. Thanks. Noel (talk) 15:24, 29 May 2005 (UTC)


 * sorry about that, was an accident, advice take. --E.A 15:52, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Turkish Cypriot Genocide
I'm at the end of my revert limit, and it needs more. Mel Etitis ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 14:48, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

E.A., What's with the edit? I took it off because of the claims made accusing the Turks of killing more than the Greeks did. Expatkiwi 00:41, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

E.A., Argy put a paragraph in that gives the Greek side of the argument about ethnic cleansing and killing. Expatkiwi 01:07, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

I added a new category: 1960 Treaty of Guarantee. you may want to add to it. I tried to put one in titled 1974 Peace Operation, but someone placed a redirect on it. Expatkiwi 01:15, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

RfA on Argyrosargyrou
I've started a Requests for arbitration on User:Argyrosargyrou. Please take a look and add any evidence you feel is relevant to Requests for arbitration/Argyrosargyrou/Evidence. -- ChrisO 22:18, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Taking on UNFanatic
E.A., Now UNFanatic is taking me on with my stance regarding Cyprus. We've been sending messages back and forth between our respective talk pages. He's not as scathing as Argyrosargyrou, but his views on Cyprus are very clear and his opinion of me as a result is just as clear. Expatkiwi 04:58, 3 June 2005

He does hold a GC POV, but at least speaking to him isnt like banging your head against a brick wall as with Argyrosargyrou. --E.A 14:23, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Erenköy
E.A., On a TRNC news site, I just read about the 1964 siege of Erenköy, and this stuff is dynamite! I put it on Wikipedia. It's an excellent example of Greek Cypriot attempts to subjugate the Turkish Cypriot minority and the resistance exibited by the Turkish Cypriots. My hat is off to those brave defenders. Expatkiwi 19:04, 3 June 2005

E.A., I had the first burn about the article. An anonymous reader told me that the proper name of the site is Kokkina and that I was not to change names at all. Well, too bad. The Hon. Representative for the TRNC in Los Angeles told me that he had family members who had defended Erenköy at the 1964 siege. I'm not going to disgrace those who defended and died there. The deaths of those who defended that town deserve to be acknowledged and honored. I'm proud of what I have written. Expatkiwi 23:10, 5 June 2005

Its a great article, let them say what they want. --E.A 23:12, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Attempts to delete list of those killed
E.A., I posted the following on Wikipedia: Murat Aga and Sandalla casualty list, Atlilar casulaty list, and 1963-1967 Turkish Cypriot Casualty List. Now someone has put these pages up for votes on deletion. Looks like somebody doesn't like seeing the actual names of those who were killed..... -- Expatkiwi 21:50, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I am the someone referenced above. Wikipedia is not a memorial.  It is an encyclopedia.  A list of names is not encyclopedia, especially not one-sided lists such as the ones that were posted.  Where is the list of casualties from the other side?  Note that I am not suggesting that such a list be created, I'm just pointing out the flaws in what was posted.
 * --Xcali 21:56, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If you have a moment...
Please revert Greco-Turkish relations to the pre-Argy version. I've done it twice already, and don't want to break 3RR rules.

If you have a moment...
Please revert Greco-Turkish relations to the pre-Argy version. I've done it twice already, and don't want to break 3RR rules. --Scimitar 22:18, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cyprus_dispute/New_version
Hi E.A,

I have come to think that most probably only a new version could help, as the current one is very lengthy and also too neutral; a less history-centric view would maybe be favorable. Would you care to drop me a note or edit directly on Cyprus_dispute/New_version? - Snchduer 17:24, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for replying fast... you said "The only disagreements with that article are coming from Greek people; Argy, Ank and UNFanatic.". You know, this is exactly the problem - I wouldnt care about Argy too much, but the other two (esp. UNFanatic) seem quite moderate to me and also open to discussion. The whole idea is to put up an article that both sides can live with, which does not seem to be the case for the current (JL's) version (even in my opinion, it is "too neutral"). It does not need to mention all the details (esp. for casualties and displacements we have an own article now), but to give an overview of the complexity of the subject. - Snchduer 18:41, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Hello again!
 * Obviously, Ank99 and UNFanatic both favour a clean start article of Cyprus dispute, however they want to be sure that the TR/TC and pro-TR/TC users cooperate properly, if it doesnt mean fighting battles on WP. - Snchduer 13:20, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

RfA
Answering for ChrisO here - anyone can provide evidence. More than one person already has. Just give it in the right format (e.g. the same as other, with links to diffs, etc) --Kiand 11:22, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)