Talk:Western Sahara

message: According to some sources, it seems that Morocco has extended its berm into Mauritanian territory and successfully split the previously contiguous SADR-controlled part into three separate regions.
Link: https://sovereignlimits.com/boundaries/morocco-western-sahara-land 2001:8003:9008:1301:9535:F3C8:6763:D1BC (talk) 01:01, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the map outdated? 

message: Please it Moroccan Sahara not western sahara 105.159.180.210 (talk) 08:15, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No and don't do this yourself. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:21, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

text: Is Moroccan Sahara 88.169.38.74 (talk) 10:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2022 

message: UN does not consider Morocco as an occupying entity of the Western Sahara. The latter is indeed in the 4th committee but it I was put there by Morocco when Spain was occupying Western Sahara. 
Change "while the remaining 80% of the territory is occupied and administered by neighboring Morocco." to "while the remaining 80% of the territory is administered by neighboring Morocco." Neglectos (talk) 12:12, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The General Assembly have called Morocco an occupier multiple times. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:39, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have any justification! since when a sovereigns country occupying it's land ? 88.169.38.74 (talk) 10:18, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I cannot justify Morocco occupying Western Sahara, which is foreign territory to them. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

text: You need to provide a source to support the requested change. - wolf 13:57, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2022

message: Should its description as a "disputed territory" be in the lead sentence? Compare with the following:
*
*
*
*
As you can see, almost no other article about a disputed territory refers to them as such in the lead sentence, I think it would be better suited to have the lead written something like this, and summarise the geography afterwards, then get into the political situation:
*
- CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs)  00:03, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how that's an improvement. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:35, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The current lead in this article gives to much weight to the current political situation IMO compared to the other ones I linked above, it should be balanced in also summarising the geography and history. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs)  01:55, 4 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Disputed territory" in lead sentence 

message: moroccan south borders is Mauritania. There is no country in UNations called western Sahara,. It's Moroccan Sahara. Eastern and western. Please correct. And always go to sources like united nations before publishing. Thank you 196.75.138.108 (talk) 13:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This article does not claim to be about a country, it's about a disupted geographical region. It clearly states "Western Sahara is a disputed territory..." in the opening sentence. The borders of the article's subject are correct. The partially-recognized country is Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. Fbergo (talk) 18:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction on Moroccan frontiers 

message: Add coordinates:  Wiki-ircecho (talk) 09:21, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 06:38, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 18 August 2023 

message: 41.147.1.220 (talk) 06:38, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:56, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 24 August 2023 

message: Any objection to reducing  to ? Srnec (talk) 23:12, 9 September 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No objection, I guess, but I think it's fine as is. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 12:24, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  First sentence 

message: The redirect Law enforcement in Western Sahara has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:54, 28 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Law enforcement in Western Sahara]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The redirect 서사하라 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  TartarTorte 12:54, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:서사하라]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Should this article include in its lead the sentence 'Western Sahara is the last African colonial state yet to achieve its independence and has been dubbed "Africa's last colony? CMD (talk) 12:42, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what options you refer to, I included the sentence under discussion which I was requested to open an RfC on. CMD (talk) 13:01, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Opening a RfC is you decision, but you only included the compromise that was reached after a long discussion and not the original options ("also known as", etc.). M.Bitton (talk) 13:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I explicitly suggested others looking for inclusion open the RfC, but this was not taken up, so I put one together on the question of the sentence under discussion using the recommended format at WP:RfC. If you have other formulations in mind, please include them in a comment. CMD (talk) 13:09, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The ones who reached consensus through a compromise aren't interested in opening a RfC (that's the job of those who are seeking a new consensus). What started the discussion was the addition of  in the lead sentence, which was reworded as  and moved to the end of the sentence  and later unbolded , before finally being moved (along with another stable sentence to where they are now). I just think that since a RfC is started, we might as well present all the options to the community. M.Bitton (talk) 13:26, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a step in DR that was suggested by the administrator who protected the article, and while any editor can lack interest in this, I'm not sure why it would be unexpected that someone else would follow up on the given advice. CMD (talk) 13:45, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for comment on inclusion of lead sentence on dubbing as "Africa's last colony" 

message: why didn't you include all the options? M.Bitton (talk) 12:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what options you refer to, I included the sentence under discussion which I was requested to open an RfC on. CMD (talk) 13:01, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Opening a RfC is you decision, but you only included the compromise that was reached after a long discussion and not the original options ("also known as", etc.). M.Bitton (talk) 13:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I explicitly suggested others looking for inclusion open the RfC, but this was not taken up, so I put one together on the question of the sentence under discussion using the recommended format at WP:RfC. If you have other formulations in mind, please include them in a comment. CMD (talk) 13:09, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The ones who reached consensus through a compromise aren't interested in opening a RfC (that's the job of those who are seeking a new consensus). What started the discussion was the addition of  in the lead sentence, which was reworded as  and moved to the end of the sentence  and later unbolded , before finally being moved (along with another stable sentence to where they are now). I just think that since a RfC is started, we might as well present all the options to the community. M.Bitton (talk) 13:26, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a step in DR that was suggested by the administrator who protected the article, and while any editor can lack interest in this, I'm not sure why it would be unexpected that someone else would follow up on the given advice. CMD (talk) 13:45, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion

message: This post will not ask for any changes to the article, but rather ask editors to be careful where they get their numbers from, on this article and on other articles.
The UN "Population division" gives a figure for Western Sahara's population at 587,259 in 2023 (that's mid-year, I believe).
But the UN "Statistics division" which puts out the Statistical Yearbook gives a figure of 76,425 with the note "Comprising the Northern Region and Southern Region." Clearly this is a different definition, being used in a way that is easy to miss.
Link to yearbook 2022: 
Under "World Summary" see "Table 3" and click on either 'pdf' or 'xls'. Link to pdf: 
Either of these sources is used in countless articles, so editors should make sure the region under discussion on Wikipedia has the same definition as whichever UN division is being sourced. Wizmut (talk) 21:22, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  United Nations disagrees with itself 

message: The western Sahara is a moroccan territory 188.146.106.121 (talk) 23:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's not and it's not clear what you want to have edited. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 3 January 2024 

message: Suggested edit to the Culture section. The statement "Physically indistinguishable from the Hassaniya-speaking Moors of Mauritania..." adds no value to this article. It is problematically drawing false equivalence based of physical appearance and defines this culture through comparison to another rather than on its own terms. I cannot imagine including a sentence like that in an article about a white majority culture? "Scottish people are physically indistinguishable from the English neighbours". Suggested replacement to "The Sahrawi people have a range of tribal affiliations that cut across present modern geo-political boundaries. Sahrawi culture has also been influenced by their experience of Spanish colonialism." 82.1.241.52 (talk) 13:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: by removal: it was just unsourced anyway. Thanks. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request: Culture section  

message: Morocan territories 195.235.191.250 (talk) 18:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Jamedeus (talk) 18:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

text: No. Also don't post noise here. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:55, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 March 2024 

message: It's the fifth least populated area, not the second as stated. Naramsim (talk) 10:55, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Skitash (talk) 13:26, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 31 March 2024 

message: My edit, that Western Sahara was not "partitioned" but control over it was taken, was return to the original as "not an improvement". I do not want to re-revert, as this would violate community rules, so I would like to explain: At issue is not an improvement yes/no, but a correction of a factual inaccuracy. To say that Western Saraha was "partitioned" would be to suggest that there was a decision, be it external or internal, on partition, as the term is used in the cases of British India or Palestine. This is not the case. On the contrary, claims (and demands) of Morocco and Mauritania were rejected by the ICJ, and the two state invaded the territory. My edit did not seek to take a position on the latter issue, but only to make the description facutally correct. I respectfully request that it be re-instated. YR on wiki (talk) 12:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I may be misunderstanding here, but Mauritania and Morocco agreed to their own self-styled border between portions of the land they tried to steal. I'm confused as to how that is not them partitioning the territory. The two states never had a dispute among themselves. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, thanks for reacting.  WS was not theirs to partition... We wouldn't say that Molotov and Ribbentrop "partitioned" Europe, would we? At most we would say that they agreed (in both cases) on how to divide their loot. What they actually did (again, in both cases) was invade.In the WS case their status and lack of rights was declared legally. I would suggest "invade," but "took control" is good enough and should satisfy even those who claim Morocco had the right to do so. It's a simple fact. YR on wiki (talk) 21:25, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, God knows it was not theirs to partition, but it still seems like it meets the definition of what partitioning is. I support you massaging the text in any way that you think clarifies. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: How about something along the lines of "In 1976, Morocco and Mauritania invaded Western Sahara and agreed to divide it between them, ..."? M.Bitton (talk) 00:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Partition"