Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:42, 13 August 2007

Archives

Archive 1

Mediation

Guys. I've just archived prior discussions. So let's start again. I suggest every single involved editor makes a brief summary of a few lines about h/er concerns. Please avoid responding to eachother for the time being. Any uninvolved editor can participate as well. Thank you. -- FayssalF - 19:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry, a summary about what?!
• About the fact that Western Sahara and the "sahrawi republic" are two distinct thing?
• I am honnest, I don't understand this action, especially that the article is looking finer and people are doing effort to edit in a productive/constructive way.
• We need rather to look at the problem where it comes from: koavf, known as militant for the independence of Western Sahara from Morocco wants to use of wikipedia to push Polisario POV, insisting on confusing Western Sahara with the "sadr".
• This behaviour had costed him to be baned/blocked from wikipedia on indefinite.
• And now that he is unblocked, even if he is on parole, he violated the rules again, just to furiousely fight for the same ideology and POV.
• Koavf is only looking for mediation because he can revert only one time/day.
• You can mediate as you can, as long as koavf edits in Western Sahara, he will edit-war every single change that does not fit Polisario's view.
• This is the problem.
• Honnestly I don't know why you don't see it and why you unblocked him.
• It's that easy: when he is away there is peace. When he is back there is war.

wikima 19:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Concerns

1. The page was moved unilaterally several times, with no discussion, let alone consensus (see also my talk.)
2. Sourced, scholarly information was added by me and reverted out with no rationale.
3. There is an associated map; certain editors asked that it be removed until it was updated to be accurate. I updated it and it was reverted.
4. Part of the article was turned into a POV fork, which was then deleted. This information has also been reverted out of the article.
5. In addition, several small formatting changes were reverted.

As one might imagine, this is frustrating, and makes for a worse article. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 20:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Note: Chad also needs to be added -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 03:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• Chad has apparently denied this information, also via its embassy in Algeria
• A known propagada source can not be used on its own as credible.

wikima 13:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Propaganda MAP is itself propaganda; you have personally added several citations from Moroccan state-run press agencies. You also did not address my above e-mail. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 00:11, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I have renamed this article because its previous title, Foreign relations of Western Sahara, was a patent nonsense, since only states establish foreign relations, but not territories.

Notice that most articles about countries deal both with the territory and the state which controls it. However, for a disputed territory, like Western Sahara, we need to clearly distinguish between the territory and the states which claim it, Morocco and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.

So, I tried to choose the best title, according to the contents of the article. When I asked for another (best) title, I got no alternative suggestion.

User:Koavf want to get back to the previous title, and I think that it's for propaganda reasons, since there was a redirection from Foreign relations of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic to this article (there was a lot of such unjustified associations between Western Sahara and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic in the English Misplaced Pages).

The contents of the article must remain in the scope of its subject. Its purpose is to provide informations about the status of the territory. The layout give priority to the current situation: the current status is detailed with 2 similar tables (for neutrality), one for the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, the other for Morocco. For the history of this status, the reader can consult the following articles: Foreign relations of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic and Foreign relations of Morocco.

Geopolitic maps are welcomed, as long as they regard both Morocco and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, not only one of these states. --Juiced lemon 17:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay... Nothing is happening here. Fayssal, what do you want to do next? If you don't respond in a few days, I am going to reinsert this sourced information. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 16:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

• What "sourced" information? And what sources? Those that says WS must be independant because Morocco is bad?
• The article is now in good progress to be balanced. You're welcome to cooperate. And cooperating means to edit neutral not to militate for the independance of any entity.

wikima 20:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, i don't know from where to begin but if the map has already been updated to reflect the "States recognizing the SADR" than i suggest its reinsertion. "Legal status of Western Sahara" is by far more neutral than "Foreign relations of Western Sahara". MAP is not an unbiased source or reference w/o doubt. It is known to be the mouthpiece of the Moroccan govt. This source, as long as WS official sources, have to be used not to make the position of any party look more legitimate.

I'll also put some additional new {unsourced} tags on some other statements. We'll have enough time until September to bring sources otherwise, the statements will be removed. -- FayssalF - 09:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Sources And what about the fact that my sourced information keeps on getting deleted? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:58, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Insert your sources back. But honestly, tell me, do you think having more than 40 references to the same Pazzanita is suitable for a wikipedia article? -- FayssalF - 15:42, 13 August 2007 (UTC)