Jump to content

Talk:Greece

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Schengen2018 (talk | contribs) at 11:37, 13 June 2018 (Eastern Aegean Islands are in Asia, not in Europe: There is no information about Greece being part of the Schengen area.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

Template:WP1.0

Schengen Area reference missing

There is no information about Greece being part of the Schengen area.

Eastern Aegean Islands are in Asia, not in Europe

The Aegean Sea is a natural border between Europe and Asia. This means that the islands off the Asian coast are clearly located in Asia. These islands are Lesbos, Chios, Samos, Ikaria and most of the Dodecanese islands. This makes Greece definitely a transcontinental country, not just "a country located in Southern Europe". John Dick 78 (talk) 21:13, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you but you are reverting everyone here, even me! Your highly disruptive actions must cease immediatelly. To edit war with the other editors and have things done your way is not how Wikipedia works. Cease immediatelly this edit warring or you will be blocked. -- SILENTRESIDENT 22:12, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I do not understand why these changes of yours which serve no purpose and especially do not improve upon our previous WP:CONSENSUS on the lead section. Now I just had to revert you one more time. Please stop immediatelly this behavior, disruption is only harmful to Wikipedia, not helpful. If you believe that any changes to the lead section which was the result of consensus, are needed, then I could appreciate if you ellaborate. -- SILENTRESIDENT 06:04, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me but the lead is much better and more accurate the way I did it. It is the same, only better. John Dick 78 (talk) 16:26, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, this arrogant attitude of yours isn't going to net you any good. Second, the changes you have proposed, although are valid to a point (I agree with them), the disruptive way you have tried to implement them does not help you and your goal, nor the way you have written it is contributing to the lead section's scope which is to provide summary info but without unecessary details. You have to understand that the lead section is the result of several discussions and any changes to it that have been reverted initially, should be taken to the talk page, analyze and explain them, and seek new WP:CONSENSUS before applying them. Edit wars and enforcing your changes while turning deaf ears to other people's calls, is not the way to go. -- SILENTRESIDENT 20:23, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. This information perhaps belongs in the main article, but not the lead. It would be WP:UNDUE to emphasise the proximity of a few islands this way at the lead. As far as arguments like Excuse me but the lead is much better and more accurate the way I did it. It is the same, only better., they won't do. They are too simplistic and ignore WP:CONSENSUS. They cannot be imposed by edit-warring either. Dr. K. 20:51, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, the whole "some islands are in Asia" is highly pedantic and thus undue, especially for the lede. Islands are not really part of any continent, that's why they're islands. Regarding the eastern Aegean islands specifically, the "Asia" thing is a favorite canard of Turkish patriots, because if the islands are in "Asia" they rightfully "belong" to Turkey. I've seen this POV being pushed many times on wikipedia. Khirurg (talk) 22:51, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Good points. I agree also with the comments about the POV-push regarding the island location. Dr. K. 22:57, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
"Islands are not really part of any continent, that's why they're islands." Very interesting view. I had never thought of this before. It solves a lot of problems really. Thank you. John Dick 78 (talk) 07:12, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Khirurg: The Turkish POV is groundless and Turkey is against the whole world with its claims to Greek islands. None ever supported Turkey over its claims of Greek islands, and I shall remind you that Greece received support from its allies, especially the USA, Russia, and the EU, including individual states such as France, Italy, Cyprus and even Germany, who have recognized and acknowledged the Greek sovereignty over the Aegean islands. I strongly disagree with the argument that "just because there is Turkish POV, Greece's transcontinental character shouldn't be acknowledged". This shows a fear syndrome towards Turkish POV and I am vehemently against this logic. For example we can not baptise Kastellorizo an "European island" or "island not belonging to any continental shelf" just because of some stupid fears that the transcontinental character of Greece could give more legitimacy to any of the ridiculous Turkish claims over its islands. Period. Greece is a transcontinental country and this only boosts the country's geostrategic importance and this has nothing to do with neighbors' claims to it. After all, the Turkish POV is just that: a POV. This bears no legitimacy or whatever and is none of Wikipedia's bussiness to bother with what Turks believe or say about the world belonging to them.
EDIT: I shall remind everyone here that the Turkish far-right spectrum is not patriotic, but ultra-nationalist. Everyone who follows closely the Turkish domestic affairs, is aware that the two terms should not be confused with each other, although at certain difficult political periods they become interchargeable. Turkish patriots never claimed Greek territory, only defended their country's unity against Kurdish seperatism. On the other hand, those who supported the mass killings of Armenians, and laid claims to Greek islands, are not really patriots in the normal sense of the word, but ultra-nationalists. That the ultra-nationalism has become the new staple in the Turkish political affairs for the past couple of decades, does not make it anymore valid than it ever was. -- SILENTRESIDENT 13:07, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Hawaii is in the Pacific. Should the U.S. article say that the U.S. is in North America, but also in the South Pacific?‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 13:40, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@El cid, el campeador: you got a point. It is better that we stick with just "Southern Europe" for now. But bear in mind that the example of Hawaii isn't exactly valid one to bring here, as Hawaii is less than 1% of US's total territory, if my memory does not fail me. So it is weird to mention the US as a Pacific nation when the pacific territories constitute less than 1% of the nation's total. On the other hand, Greece's Asian territories of Rhodes, Samos, Chios Lesbos, and Carpathos, if combined, constitute about 5% to 10% of Greece's total territory. -- SILENTRESIDENT 16:08, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with @El cid, el campeador:. Even if the transcontinental percentage is 5 to 10% for Greece, and 1% for the US, these percentages are small compared to the total for either country. This is where LEAD and UNDUE come in. No need for weasel words ex. "mostly in Europe" to pedantically add this to the lead, or call Greece "transcontinental". As far as the comments regarding the Turkish nationalists, I don't think there is any "fear" about their intent. As I understand Khirurg's comment, it was intended to analyse their POV; I don't think he was worried about it. Dr. K. 17:07, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I know about the past fightings between Greek and Turkish Wikipedians and I am glad to hear this here is not the case I don't want this to ever be. I am newer user in Wikipedia than most of you are, and I wasn't part of this, so pardon me if I misunderstood the whole POV issue. -- SILENTRESIDENT 21:02, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

On second thoughts, I agree with Silent Resident. And if we say the Greek islands do not belong to any continent, then Japan, Indonesia or the UK do not belong to any continent either. This is crazy. So we have to accept the fact that a big part of the Greek islands in the Aegean Sea belong to the Asian continent. I would place the Europe / Asia borderline starting from the Turkish Straits and reaching down to somewhere between Karpathos and Rhodes. If you notice, this same line goes straight down to the Suez Canal. Greece is a transcontinental country for sure. John Dick 78 (talk) 21:22, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@John Dick 78: it is unfortunate that you went again on edit warring now. You have argued that, for this, you have my support, but no. Absolutley not. I may agree with you in the scope, but, like how I said above (copy pasting it here for you to read it carefully): It is better that we stick with just "Southern Europe" for now.. This is, because even if i had a valid argument, that doesn't make it more valid for inclusion to the article's lead. I highly recommend that you refrain from future edit warring with others and seek to build a new WP:CONSENSUS first, as this is how Wikipedia works. For now we stick with the current consensus, which is to not include this info on the Lead. Sorry. -- SILENTRESIDENT 23:40, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Text became sandwiched due to larger pictures

Both on my monitor and on my mobile, I have noticed now a particular issue with sandwiched text in various parts of the article. Here an example photo: http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e127/SilentResident/Wikipedia/Sandwich%20Issue_zpsr8hthb01.png

I have reduced abit the picture sizes to help resolve the issue. But that makes the maps smaller and harder to read at the first glance. -- SILENTRESIDENT 20:37, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

After installing and uninstalling the web browser, I have realized that the pictures never had issues with their sizes and the text was never sandwiched; this was a problem affecting my web browser which made everything, especially the media files, disproportionally larger. I am reverting now my edits. -- SILENTRESIDENT 23:14, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 May 2018

Greece has a police force, but there are still criminal issues in the country. The prison population in Greece including pre-trial detainees and remand prisoners came to a total of 9,956 people as of January 2017. With the prison population being so big, the confinement areas and jails are used to overcrowding. The total occupancy level based on official capacity was at 103.9 percent in 2014. Not only was it 100 percent full, but then some. Why is there such a problem with the intake of criminals? What has the government done to help the country's issue? Well, they have added many more prisons and jails to smaller towns. This not only helps with the overcrowding situation, but it adds jobs to others. This way, some people could be focused on getting a job at a prison, rather than being the one behind bars. Not only is over crowding a problem, but so is the spike in crime and poor human right records. The spike in crime was mainly caused by the country's recession. People did not have a source of money and they needed it to survive. As for the poor human rights records, prisoners recorded things such as poor sanitation, no clothes or food, and no medical attention. The medical attention they did receive was from prison guards, not professionals. Greece has tried to make improvements within the jails and prisons, but it still is not the greatest. The reasons may include the fact that the country does not have enough money to pay for prisoner needs. They are still people, and need the basic necessities to live. <ref>Greece. (2018, April 02). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greece/ref> Ambergert (talk) 14:20, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article.
Furthermore, your proposal does not seem to have been written from a Neutral point of view - Arjayay (talk) 14:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)- Arjayay (talk) 14:53, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]