Talk:Varosha, Famagusta

Cyprus Low‑importance

	Cyprus portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cyprus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cyprus on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CyprusWikipedia:WikiProject CyprusTemplate:WikiProject CyprusCypriot
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ghost towns Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ghost towns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ghost towns on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ghost townsWikipedia:WikiProject Ghost townsTemplate:WikiProject Ghost townsGhost town
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities

Disambiguation?

It seems many cities have a Varosha quarter, and the word means "city" in Hungarian (see Talk:Lovech#Varosha). How about making it a disambiguation page? --Cameltrader 20:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

This island never been Greek in history Ottoman empire allowed Greeks to live in this island thats the reason this island have Greek citizens but because of past Greek revolution in 60s and Makarios and Solmon lots of innocent cypress Turks were murdered. United Nations and UK only watched. Turkish Republic was the one of guarantor Nation others were Greece and UK but in the past, Island owners were Ottoman Empire it mean Turk , Turkish Republic want to help from UK to protect Turks who living in island but UK didnt care finally Turkish army attacked the island because of protect cypress Turks. And no one expect they can conquar Island . USA blocks selling gun to Turkish army even all of this They won the war. But world dont want to accept lots of Turks were murdered on this island if you search you can see one of Turkish army doctors family were murdered to slay I mean his wife and his little children whatever this Island were directed with cypress Greek and Turks were represented minority they were accepted this eventhough there was no solution and Turkih Republic were rights on this Island they used this right.So THERE IS NO INNOVATİON! They can live in Varosha easyly but they forbiden to protect it . I hope world search this cypress problem on lots of sources because, dont know clearly all facts and things. Turkish Republic always one of stepbrother to Eu and USA, but it's land and it's army always necessery to use from EU and USA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.103.24.76 (talk) 23:54, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place for propaganda. You added nothing of value to the discussion so please keep your non-historical propaganda out of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.37.34 (talk) 21:15, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Needs sources!

This article needs sources badly, and is possibly not neutral.

"During its heyday the Varosha quarter of Famagusta was not only the number one tourist destination in Cyprus, but between 1970 and 1974 it was one of the most popular tourist destinations in the world, and was a favourite destination of wealthy, rich and famous stars such as Elizabeth Taylor, Richard Burton, Raquel Welch and Brigitte Bardot."

Really? In a quick google search, I couldn't find any proof for those celebrities being in Famagusta at the time, nor that the place itself was such a hotspot in the 70s. All I could find was random blogs rephrasing or quoting precisely this paragraph from Wikipedia. It's quite a statement and thus needs to be backed up. Same for the rest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.16.112.153 (talk) 11:05, 13 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Marash, Famagusta → Varosha, Famagusta – The article was moved from Varosha, Famagusta to Marash, Famagusta by User:E4024 at 22:12 (GMT+1), 20 November 2012 without any discussion. This is a controversial move. I am requesting that the article be moved back to Varosha, Famagusta in line with WP:Naming Conventions until a genuine discussion has taken place. Even the move within itself is not consistent as the Turkish name of the place is Maraş (or sometimes referred as Kapalı Maraş) not Marash as suggested by User:E4024. -- Iñfẽstør ^{T• C• U} 21:57, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AS per above, moving the page with no discussion is unacceptable. Someone change it back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.251.63.26 (talk) 22:08, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict in indent order)

This is the English Wikipedia; we do not say "İstanbul" but Istanbul, or not "Paşa" but Pasha. No conflict at all... --E4024 (talk) 22:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The change of the title from Varosha, Famagusta (11,200 hits) to Marash, Famagusta (4 hits) is unjustified and controversial. Sad to observe that E4024 is pushing an agenda, merely an attempt to Turkification of what the international community considers as occupied territory of a sovereign state. 23x2 _φ 22:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not personalize things. (Your participation in WP is more controversial due to suspected socks but that I am following separately.) Simply look at the sign board (road sign) provided in the article, in Turkish, in the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus sovereign territory.... --E4024 (talk) 22:46, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that the page moving done by E4024 is POV imposing and controversial. Administrator intervention should be requested to reverse the POV imposing bad faith edit by E4024. --Car8025

I think that that admin intervention would be necessary to remove your personal attack. What "bad faith" are you talking about, your false accusation towards me? --E4024 (talk) 23:24, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Its quite clear from the comments above and below whether its a bad faith edit or not. Changing an article name just like that because you consider the Turkish name as the dominant one is not what I would call a good faith edit. Besides that, I remember a few days ago when you actually considered the sources by nebilla as "perfectly sourced arguments " in the Cyprus dispute page while he/she just chose specific half sentences from sources which supported the exact opposite, to force his/her opinion on the Legality of the Turkish invasion. This was enough to understand the quality of your edits on the Cyprus problem. --Car8025 —Preceding undated comment added 23:35, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - From what I have seen, Varosha is prevalent in reliable English language sources. Seric2 (talk) 14:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment / support. First-language English speaker here. I've read/heard of Varosha, Famagusta, but not Marash, Famagusta (or Maraş, Famagusta). 213.246.91.158 (talk) 07:01, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question Before moving the page to another name, I saw no previous discussion about this issue; so made the move without hesitation, as a non-controversial issue. Once I made the move a discussion has been requested and a user (later) reverted my move. Have we discussed enough? Should we not have to wait for an uninvolved admin to close the RM discussion? I am a bit confused... --E4024 (talk) 13:31, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - All the TRNC places in Wikipedia are written as their English (actually names that are derived from Greek or Latin) correspondence. Take Nicosia for instance, the article name is neither the Greek (Λευκωσία) nor the Turkish (Lefkoşa) name. Moreover, TRNC is very much a de-facto state (no one recognizes the authorities of TRNC but Turkey). That's why all TRNC place names are not in Turkish in Wikipedia. But they are indeed displayed in Turkish next to the Greek and English names (in the beginning of the articles and infoboxes).

Also, @E4024: I can understand that you want to push a Turkish naming agenda here, please don't. Until TRNC is recognised by the rest of the world the Turkish names will always remain de-facto. I, myself, also recognise the sovereignty of TRNC but it does not change the fact that it's a de-facto state. Also you made a careless edit totally destroying my nota bene! -- Iñfẽstør ^{T• C• U} 13:55, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you a State or an International Organization to recognise or not a State? BTW I did not ask from you additional arguments on your choice of name, I made a procedural question to all, especially the admins... --E4024 (talk) 14:48, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was trying to explain why your page move was controversial and argument invalid but apparently you have no intention of understanding whatsoever. -- Iñfẽstør ^{T• C• U} 14:55, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

What is the etymology of Varosha? Böri (talk) 09:32, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Categorized as populated?

Isn't a bit strange that this article is categoriezed as "Populated places in Famagusta District"? --81.166.110.108 (talk) 14:48, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is Cyprus in Asia?

Is Cyprus in Asia? If not, the category is incorrect.--DThomsen8 (talk) 18:50, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cyprus is considered part of Europe. In fact, Istanbul is the only reason Turkey can qualify for EU membership. If Turkey did not possess Istanbul and the areas around it, then Turkey would not be allowed into the EU. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.103.37.34 (talk) 21:21, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quarter, suburb or town?

Can we make up our minds? Alakzi (talk) 01:35, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"varoş" pseudo-theory

The Turkish magazine "Yenidüzen" lists the word "varoş" as the source of Greek Varosia. Yenidüzen is a tabloid and thus not a reliable source. The etymology section shall remain empty until an apt and proper word origin is found. Schternschnüppe (talk) 19:51, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the article will remain in the status quo (with that sourced section) until we reach a consensus. You have been undone by more than one editor, and as I pointed out on your talk page, The content has been in the article for quite some time, and it has a source. You do not get to arbitrarily decide that it must be removed. Meters (talk) 20:09, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

aCtuAlLy, I am starting this discussion because I have realized I must work through peaceful means. At least contribute to the conversation, and do NOT patronize me and conduct ad hominem attacks just because I am new here. Schternschnüppe (talk) 20:38, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We are not patronizing you, and you are the one who made personal attacks in the edit summary on your talk page.

Has there been any previous discussion about the use of https://www.yeniduzen.com/ as a source? Given the content here https://www.yeniduzen.com/yeniduzen-gazetesi-yayin-ilkeleri-8s.htm it has the appearance of a reasonably professional outlet. Why do you think it is unacceptable? Meters (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OP has been indef'ed. Does anyone else have any comments about the etymology section and that source? Meters (talk) 01:11, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And OP now tagged as a CU sock too... Meters (talk) 05:07, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for dealing with this Meters. I'll add a further source to the section to help prevent further disruption. --GGT (talk) 08:30, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

border

"Ceasefire line" brings war-like situations in mind. Since 2003, 9 BORDER crossings were opened. Greeks and Turks can pass to the other side.
"Border" does NOT necessarily imply "de jure".
"Border" does NOT necessarily imply "between COUNTRIES":
Border (Collins Cubuild dictionary definition) "The BORDER between two countries OR REGIONS is the dividing line between them".
BBC(12.11.2018): "Cyprus opens first new border crossings in years."
Aljazeera(12.11.2018):"Two border crossings open in divided Cyprus, first in 8 years"
Daily Sabah (12.11.2018): "2 border crossings open in Cyprus, first in 8 years"
Brit on the Move: "Cyprus Border Crossing Between North and South Cyprus" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.175.228.202 (talk) 19:00, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The legitimacy of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) is recognized worldwide (International court rulings and national court decisions of various countries)

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) Ruling on Kosovo (2010):

"THERE IS NOTHING IN INTERNATIONAL LAW THAT PROHIBITS DECLARATIONS OF INDEPENDENCE, and the RECOGNITION OF A STATE IS A POLITICAL MATTER."

The United States of America (USA), in the ICJ’s 2010 Kosovo ruling, rejected the Greek Cypriot stance and issued a statement favorable to the Turkish Cypriots:

Harold Hongju Koh (The USA's representative in the UN-ICJ 2010 Kosovo case on behalf of the USA): "The argument advanced by Cyprus against the legality of Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence is incorrect. Cyprus attempted to compare the 1244 process to the 'heartbreaking but misleading situation' of a parent sending their young child into state care, never to see them again. I argued, however, that a more accurate analogy would be the futile attempt by the state to forcibly return an adult child to an abusive home when the child no longer wishes to return, especially after the parent and child have LONG LIVED APART, and REPEATED ATTEMPTS AT RECONCILIATION HAVE REPEATEDLY FAILED. In such a case, as here, a DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE WOULD BE THE ONLY VALID OPTION and would undoubtedly be lawful.”
https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/141/141-20091208-ORA-01-00-BI.pdf (Page38; Paragraph40)

Accordingly, the US Federal Court (on 9 October 2014) declared the TRNC as a "democratic republic with a president, a prime minister, a legislative body, and a judiciary."

In the UN-ICJ 2010 Kosovo ruling, ICJ Judge Trindade: "The emphasis has shifted from the status of the TERRITORIES to the NEEDS AND DESIRES OF THE PEOPLE."
https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/141/141-20100722-ADV-01-08-EN.pdf (Page550; Paragraph66)

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR; 2 July 2013):

"Although the regime in the northern area lacks international recognition, THE DE FACTO RECOGNITION OF THE REGIME’S ACTIONS IN THE NORTH MAY BE NECESSARY FOR PRACTICAL PURPOSES. Therefore, the adoption of civil, administrative, or criminal legal measures by the authorities of the 'TRNC', and their application or enforcement within the territory of the regime in the north, may be seen as having a LEGAL BASIS IN DOMESTIC LAW for the purposes of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)."
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-122907

The United States Federal Court (9 October 2014):

"...Although the US does not recognize the TRNC as a state, it can be said that the TRNC purportedly operates as a DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC with a president, prime minister, legislature and judiciary...The TRNC is NOT vulnerable to a lawsuit in Washington."
https://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2009cv01967/139002/53

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR; 2 September 2015):

"The judicial system in the 'TRNC', including both civil and criminal courts, reflects the judicial and customary law tradition of Cyprus in its operation and procedures, and therefore, the courts of the 'TRNC' should be regarded as 'established by law' in reference to their 'constitutional and legal foundation. The ECHR had previously ruled that the judicial system established in the 'TRNC' should be considered 'established by law' based on the 'constitutional and legal foundation' that sustains it. Moreover, the ECHR does NOT accept that the courts in the 'TRNC', as a whole, lack independence and/or impartiality. When an action by the authorities of the 'TRNC' complies with the EXISTING LAWS OF NORTHERN CYPRUS, such actions, in principle, have a legal basis in domestic law for the purposes of the European Convention on Human Rights.
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-155000

PS: Here, the ECtHR, by referring to the "laws in force in the northern region of Cyprus", means the laws enacted and enforced by the TRNC in northern Cyprus (see the ECtHR’s 02July2013 ruling). In summary, according to the ECtHR, the courts of the TRNC are INDEPENDENT AND IMPARTIAL.

United Kingdom High Court (3 February 2017):

"There was NO duty in UK law upon the Government to refrain from recognising Northern Cyprus. The United Nations itself works with Northern Cyprus law enforcement agencies and facilitates co-operation between the two parts of the island...The cooperation between the UK police and legal institutions in Northern Cyprus is LAWFUL."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/03/criminals-fleeing-british-justice-can-no-longer-use-cyprus-safe
http://ambamarblearch-media.com/sites/default/files/dpp_files/TT.pdf, Page6. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.174.38.177 (talk) 11:24, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]