Talk:Seizure of Abu Musa and the Greater and Lesser Tunbs

message: This artickle was started by The Honorable Kermanshahi 13:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: What a one-sided load of propaganda.  If I am to believe this mess, the Arabs who lived on an uninhabited island did all the shooting?  82.194.62.200 (talk) 03:31, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Total Propaganda 

message: On 30 November 1971 the Iranian Navy seized the islands under small resistance of the tiny Arab police force stationed there. The Iranians were instructed not to open fire, and the first (and according to some sources only) shots came from the Arab resistance which killed three Iranian marines and injured one. According to some sources, the Arab civilian population of Greater Tunb was then deported, but according to others the island had already been uninhabited for some time earlier.[4]
So the marines were shot and killed by the inhabitants of an uninhabited island? This one does take the biscuit... Bazuz (talk) 13:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: By this account, the troops would have been shot by the police force stationed on an uninhabited island. There is a big difference between people living on an island, and people temporarily stationed there. Also other accounts claim the island had 120 or 150 inhabitants, depending on the account.Ff11 (talk) 21:09, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  I still don't get it 

message: Regarding the poll being posted here repeatedly:
:1. Reliability of YouGov is not clear.
:2. Even if YouGov is credible, they say they have used "online panel" which is the worst method of polling in MENA where many are not online-savy (older generation, people from less-rich Arab countries, etc.), resulting in biased sample, hence not being able to claim that your population (Arabs) have the same views as the respondents to this poll have. You can get confirmation of this from any survey specialist who knows the region, this is a relatively basic issue in survey methodology.
In conclusion, it would be misleading and scientifically inaccurate to call this poll a true representation of the opinions of general Arab population. Farmanesh (talk) 23:49, 23 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unscientific poll 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Seizure of Abu Musa and the Greater and Lesser Tunbs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070622155007/http://www.american.edu/ted/ABUMUSA.HTM to http://www.american.edu/TED/abumusa.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:50, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article doesn't read like it was written from a neutral point of view. In particular the additions of this revision seem to be biased, e.g. "littoral [sic] dictatorships', but the previous revision seems to be biased as well? I'm not knowledgeable on the subject so can't improve it myself. alexconlin (talk) 23:17, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-neutral POV? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Abu Musa and the Greater and Lesser Tunbs dispute. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080229133058/http://www.hiik.de/konfliktbarometer/pdf/Konfliktbarometer_2001.pdf to http://www.hiik.de/konfliktbarometer/pdf/Konfliktbarometer_2001.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:59, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: If this source is going to be reverted to, I think this is ridiculous as it counters an unbiased third party, mentioned in previous sentence; it is as though to find something contrary to a neutral observer and of a non-authoritative source. Please stop reversing my edits! Earwigwas (talk) 04:15, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello. I don't understand your statement. How is Mattair biased? He is a US based author and a third non-invovled party. The information is also attributed to him. In a similar sense then, multiple information in the article cited by Iranian Iranologist Pirouz Mojtahedzadeh, including the previous sentence, may also be called biased depending on who you ask. This sounds like WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT. Please provide a valid reason for your removal of cited information. Thanks --Wikiemirati (talk) 04:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Mattair's work cited is published by the Emirates Centre for Strategic Studies and Research, which is a government-sponsored institution. So, it is no wonder to see a publication of the ECSSR parroting the official position of the UAE. Pahlevun (talk) 20:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated use of Mattair source 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:23, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion