![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text from Northern Cyprus was copied into Human rights in Northern Cyprus with this edit on 15:02, 23 April 2011. Northern Cyprus now serves to provide attribution for that content in Human rights in Northern Cyprus. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see this history; for its talk page, see Talk:Northern Cyprus. |
This article focuses on human rights in Northern Cyprus, which are generally respected. It should not be emphasized in the article that Turkey violates human rights etc. This article should not turn into an Anti-Turkist article, and the last thing I want for this article is to be tagged. It should not also be emphasized that there are lots of violations in the country. But the violations should of course be listed, although it should always be remembered that human rights are generally respected. And the important thing is the violations rather than who is responsible. There cannot be a large section called "Responsibility of Turkey" at the very first place because of just one sentence. And since ECHR decided that all human rights violations were committed by Turkey, all the violations can be placed in such a section. Wikipedia does not discuss legitimacy, and one quote by the ECHR is not enough to create such a section. What about the US, the UK, the UN? -- Seksen iki yüz kırk beş ( talk) 16:52, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
However, it remains that the displaced persons of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974, who are the legal owners of the vast majority of land and property in Northern Cyprus as ruled by the European Court of Human Rights, are prevented from returning to their homes.
How can this statement be related with the democracy in a country. -- Seksen iki yüz kırk beş ( talk) 17:09, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
"Greek Cypriots and Maronite residents [of Northern Cyprus] are prohibited from participating in Turkish Cypriot "national" elections." [1] Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 17:30, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
I have doubts about whether the The International Association for the Protection of Human Rights in Cyprus is neutral. It says, "The International Association for the Protection of Human Rights in Cyprus was established in 1987 by several well – known Cypriot lawyers and jurists, under the presidency of the then Deputy Advocate – General, Loukis Loucaides." As Cypriot means Greek Cypriot here, this associaton barely looks the issue from a Greek POV. -- Seksen iki yüz kırk beş ( talk) 15:25, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Every murder violates the right to life. And every country has mudered someone in some point in their history. But is there a section called "right to life" in Human rights in the United States or Human rights in North Korea? No! But this does not mean they have never violated it. The point in not having a section called "right to life" is that if you say that "the right to life is generally respected", it makes no sense because it should be generally respected if there is someone living in the country. Four, five or whatever number of murders there are, unless there is a massacre, such a section title is inconvenient. -- Seksen iki yüz kırk beş ( talk) 11:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
There is an obvious WP:DUE violation here. Although most reports say that human rights are generally respected, most sections just contain violations, which are more likely to be individual cases and see this: Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint. This article obvliously does noy do that, it lists violations in all the sections. Therefore, I am tagging the article. -- Seksen iki yüz kırk beş ( talk) 15:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Your argument is generalistic. You have not given one single example of POV within the article as it currently stands (if there were you would have deleted it already). Please be specific. Cite one and preferably two sentences with a POV. Bearing in mind that all citations are well referenced and cannot be descibed as POV. If you cannot then I will remove the tag. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 12:10, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
You cannot exclude the period between 1974 and 1983 just because the Republic of Turkey decided to call the occupied territory "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus". It is not recognised by any other country. Your suggestion is a POV restricted to the sphere-of-influence of the Republic of Turkey. Wikipedia is not part of the Republic of Turkey or its territories. Not yet at least. Are you suggesting that I create a new article called the "Human rights of the occupied northern part of Cyprus"? How else could that be segregated. Quite happy to create a new article called the Human rights of the occupied northern part of Cyprus. Moreover, there is nothing in this article that is not the direct responsibility of the puppet-regime in the occupied territory that is called "Northern Cyprus" on Wikipedia. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 16:12, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
This is turning to a mess of propaganda. You just try to delete or take down the positive things, in order to promote your ideas. And you have the ridiculous claim of chronological order for this. Do you really expect anyone to believe in these?
"This article is in CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER, earliest events first, to avoid POV-based rearrangement of information. There are many reports by international organisations that make annual general reports about human rights over each calendar year. These one year reports do not represent or summarise an accurate historical record of Human rights in Northern Cyprus. It is therefore not acceptable to pass-off the latest one year report as a summary of all the Human Rights issues in Northern Cyprus since the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974. This article is meant to include the Human Rights record from 1974 and not from when the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus was founded."
It is your opinion about the yearly reports. I myself think they are very useful. You have no right to put you personal opinion on an article. Wikipedia needs being kept up to date. Recent events are more important than the history. If you always put the oldest first, and ignore the improvements from that time, that will be an obvious POV-pushing. It is like putting historical population of a country before its current population. -- Seksen ( talk) 12:58, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should content based entirely on the 1994 CERD report be included in the article? -- GGT ( talk) 22:30, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
The CERD report that has been extensively used in the section for the enclaved is an official report submitted by the Republic of Cyprus. This is a clear case of a conflict of interest, meticulous care should be taken in Cyprus-related articles to avoid such resources as both sides have fabricated atrocities/human rights violations. Upon evaluation of the report, my anticipation of bias was confirmed; for example, while the issues about the Greek-Cypriot displaced persons are discussed, while displaced Turkish Cypriots are not even mentioned. The claims in the article, such as forced labor imposed on the enclaved, appear to be entirely unsubstantiated: I have found no reference to such incidents in any other reports, independent articles or resources or even news articles. They only appear in this report and propaganda websites. Considering that the Cypriot govt has no access to these areas, significant questions regarding the methodology used to produce the claims in the report also surface. I believe it would be fair to consider the report an unreliable source at this point, and am removing claims referenced with it, which I believe should only be re-inserted if independent confirmation is found.
Another issue that I have observed is the language used in the article: "In January 2009, the Turkish Cypriot Human Rights Foundation (TCHRF), acknowledged that..." While the TCHRF is a bona fide foundation, its resources and research capabilities are very limited and many of its "reports" cited in the article are general statements, unsubstantiated by specific/widespread incidents. While it is an independent resource, I think at this point its claims should not be presented as solid facts and the language used should reflect that.
-- GGT ( talk) 22:42, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The issue, as explained above, has now been submitted for an RfC. Just to emphasize, the RoC is a party that is directly involved in the Cypriot issue and it will naturally be in its interests to denounce the human rights situation in the north through unrealistic claims, and a large section of the article is based on a report by the RoC. For further evidence, please read above. Such issues are also inherent in Turkish Cypriot governmental reports, which I have seen to claim purported desecration of religious sites without any confirmation. -- GGT ( talk) 21:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Human rights in Northern Cyprus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Human rights in Northern Cyprus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:31, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Human rights in Northern Cyprus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.financialmirror.com/News/Cyprus_and_World_News/11314When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:38, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Text from Northern Cyprus was copied into Human rights in Northern Cyprus with this edit on 15:02, 23 April 2011. Northern Cyprus now serves to provide attribution for that content in Human rights in Northern Cyprus. For attribution and to access older versions of the copied text, please see this history; for its talk page, see Talk:Northern Cyprus. |
This article focuses on human rights in Northern Cyprus, which are generally respected. It should not be emphasized in the article that Turkey violates human rights etc. This article should not turn into an Anti-Turkist article, and the last thing I want for this article is to be tagged. It should not also be emphasized that there are lots of violations in the country. But the violations should of course be listed, although it should always be remembered that human rights are generally respected. And the important thing is the violations rather than who is responsible. There cannot be a large section called "Responsibility of Turkey" at the very first place because of just one sentence. And since ECHR decided that all human rights violations were committed by Turkey, all the violations can be placed in such a section. Wikipedia does not discuss legitimacy, and one quote by the ECHR is not enough to create such a section. What about the US, the UK, the UN? -- Seksen iki yüz kırk beş ( talk) 16:52, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
However, it remains that the displaced persons of the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974, who are the legal owners of the vast majority of land and property in Northern Cyprus as ruled by the European Court of Human Rights, are prevented from returning to their homes.
How can this statement be related with the democracy in a country. -- Seksen iki yüz kırk beş ( talk) 17:09, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
"Greek Cypriots and Maronite residents [of Northern Cyprus] are prohibited from participating in Turkish Cypriot "national" elections." [1] Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 17:30, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
I have doubts about whether the The International Association for the Protection of Human Rights in Cyprus is neutral. It says, "The International Association for the Protection of Human Rights in Cyprus was established in 1987 by several well – known Cypriot lawyers and jurists, under the presidency of the then Deputy Advocate – General, Loukis Loucaides." As Cypriot means Greek Cypriot here, this associaton barely looks the issue from a Greek POV. -- Seksen iki yüz kırk beş ( talk) 15:25, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Every murder violates the right to life. And every country has mudered someone in some point in their history. But is there a section called "right to life" in Human rights in the United States or Human rights in North Korea? No! But this does not mean they have never violated it. The point in not having a section called "right to life" is that if you say that "the right to life is generally respected", it makes no sense because it should be generally respected if there is someone living in the country. Four, five or whatever number of murders there are, unless there is a massacre, such a section title is inconvenient. -- Seksen iki yüz kırk beş ( talk) 11:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
There is an obvious WP:DUE violation here. Although most reports say that human rights are generally respected, most sections just contain violations, which are more likely to be individual cases and see this: Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represents all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint. This article obvliously does noy do that, it lists violations in all the sections. Therefore, I am tagging the article. -- Seksen iki yüz kırk beş ( talk) 15:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Your argument is generalistic. You have not given one single example of POV within the article as it currently stands (if there were you would have deleted it already). Please be specific. Cite one and preferably two sentences with a POV. Bearing in mind that all citations are well referenced and cannot be descibed as POV. If you cannot then I will remove the tag. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 12:10, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
You cannot exclude the period between 1974 and 1983 just because the Republic of Turkey decided to call the occupied territory "Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus". It is not recognised by any other country. Your suggestion is a POV restricted to the sphere-of-influence of the Republic of Turkey. Wikipedia is not part of the Republic of Turkey or its territories. Not yet at least. Are you suggesting that I create a new article called the "Human rights of the occupied northern part of Cyprus"? How else could that be segregated. Quite happy to create a new article called the Human rights of the occupied northern part of Cyprus. Moreover, there is nothing in this article that is not the direct responsibility of the puppet-regime in the occupied territory that is called "Northern Cyprus" on Wikipedia. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 16:12, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
This is turning to a mess of propaganda. You just try to delete or take down the positive things, in order to promote your ideas. And you have the ridiculous claim of chronological order for this. Do you really expect anyone to believe in these?
"This article is in CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER, earliest events first, to avoid POV-based rearrangement of information. There are many reports by international organisations that make annual general reports about human rights over each calendar year. These one year reports do not represent or summarise an accurate historical record of Human rights in Northern Cyprus. It is therefore not acceptable to pass-off the latest one year report as a summary of all the Human Rights issues in Northern Cyprus since the Turkish invasion of Cyprus in 1974. This article is meant to include the Human Rights record from 1974 and not from when the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus was founded."
It is your opinion about the yearly reports. I myself think they are very useful. You have no right to put you personal opinion on an article. Wikipedia needs being kept up to date. Recent events are more important than the history. If you always put the oldest first, and ignore the improvements from that time, that will be an obvious POV-pushing. It is like putting historical population of a country before its current population. -- Seksen ( talk) 12:58, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should content based entirely on the 1994 CERD report be included in the article? -- GGT ( talk) 22:30, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
The CERD report that has been extensively used in the section for the enclaved is an official report submitted by the Republic of Cyprus. This is a clear case of a conflict of interest, meticulous care should be taken in Cyprus-related articles to avoid such resources as both sides have fabricated atrocities/human rights violations. Upon evaluation of the report, my anticipation of bias was confirmed; for example, while the issues about the Greek-Cypriot displaced persons are discussed, while displaced Turkish Cypriots are not even mentioned. The claims in the article, such as forced labor imposed on the enclaved, appear to be entirely unsubstantiated: I have found no reference to such incidents in any other reports, independent articles or resources or even news articles. They only appear in this report and propaganda websites. Considering that the Cypriot govt has no access to these areas, significant questions regarding the methodology used to produce the claims in the report also surface. I believe it would be fair to consider the report an unreliable source at this point, and am removing claims referenced with it, which I believe should only be re-inserted if independent confirmation is found.
Another issue that I have observed is the language used in the article: "In January 2009, the Turkish Cypriot Human Rights Foundation (TCHRF), acknowledged that..." While the TCHRF is a bona fide foundation, its resources and research capabilities are very limited and many of its "reports" cited in the article are general statements, unsubstantiated by specific/widespread incidents. While it is an independent resource, I think at this point its claims should not be presented as solid facts and the language used should reflect that.
-- GGT ( talk) 22:42, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
The issue, as explained above, has now been submitted for an RfC. Just to emphasize, the RoC is a party that is directly involved in the Cypriot issue and it will naturally be in its interests to denounce the human rights situation in the north through unrealistic claims, and a large section of the article is based on a report by the RoC. For further evidence, please read above. Such issues are also inherent in Turkish Cypriot governmental reports, which I have seen to claim purported desecration of religious sites without any confirmation. -- GGT ( talk) 21:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Human rights in Northern Cyprus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:32, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Human rights in Northern Cyprus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:31, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on Human rights in Northern Cyprus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.financialmirror.com/News/Cyprus_and_World_News/11314When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:38, 8 November 2017 (UTC)