Talk:Second Sahrawi Intifada

message: was formerly listed as a good article, but was removed from the listing because 
POV
This article is absolutely inoccurate and not neutral. Please comply with WP principles. Best regards. Daryou 09:05, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: okay, it's been more than a month, and no reply. i am now removing the NPOV tag, and updating the page. Arre 02:30, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, I have noticed this and it is ridiculously POV. First, the "Intefada" appelation is not only absurd, I have never heard it before. Blowing up the disturbances into an "Intefada" may serve the activists circles, but certainly no outside neutral observer would so name the rather limited riots that. Although this minor event hardly merits an encyclopedia entry, I have edited down to core events and information, and removed the regurgitation with respect to Saharan history etc. (Collounsbury 07:02, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: {{PAGENAME}} removed from [[Wikipedia:Good articles]]

message: I just uploaded two images. I know they are not copyrighted (but rather intended to be spread by those who took them), so I hope they pass WP copyright control and stay up. Anyway, I'm not particularly good at editing pages, so anyone who could rearrange these images in a better way, please do so. I'm not very happy with the result as it stands... Arre 23:53, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: Having just run across this bizarre article, I am afraid I have to agree with many of the prior objections by Daryou. 
First, as an analyst of the region, I have never heard the riots referred to as an intefada except by Polisario activist sources. Writing the article in the present form implies (i) the reference is common and well-known, (ii) used outside certain political circles. Neither is the case. The article adopts effectively a political point of view with barely disguised langauge. Encyclopedia should not adopt party-political views. Further, the description of events appears to be largely drawn from Polisario sourcing, with a nod to more neutral international human rights sourcing or international news sourcing. I am slapping a factual accuracy and NPOV on this since the edits to core facts was reverted. (Collounsbury 02:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Don't be childish, a typo. First, the very article is absurd. A series of minor riots and demonstrations over several months hardly merits this lengthy treatment on a compartive basis with the Palestinian intefada or even the the Lebanese usage. Second, leaving that aside, the usage intefada itself is tendencious as it is clearly a party-political usage intending to play off of the Palestinian model, and it is not in common usage. As I said, I am professional analyst of the region, never saw this before this article - although I was well-aware of the WS incidents. As a professional, if the usage were common outside of activist circles, I would have seen it. Third, the language used is POV (hint, non-POV does not mean using partisan language and then mentioning at the end of the paragraph, oh yeah, the other guys disagree/characterise otherwise) throughout, adopts the Polisario POV re territory, and goes beyond the information provided in neutral sourcing. It is, in short, party-political activist agitprop dressed up as an article. A NPOV article would not adopt the Intefada usage as it is not used outside one side's agitprop, would stick to neutral characterisations and to facts from neutral sources. Further, much of the article merely repeats other WS pages you've written. There is no need for massive regurgitation (Collounsbury 02:20, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  [personal attack removed - FrancisTyers 09:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

text:  A teenage kid dying from getting whacked on the head from police interaction happens all the bloody time (whatever re occupying Kingdom, if you think the government would be any better under a shitty military dictatorship a la Mauretania, you're hallunicating). Police brutality happens all the time in region for all kinds of reasons. [personal attack removed - FrancisTyers 09:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

text: You needn't give me any idiocy about Western media either, I am fluent in Arabic as well as French, and my goddamned job is to cover the MENA region.
Whatever. In terms of this discussion, I honestly couldn't care less what languages you speak, where you've been, or how you put food on the table. The issue at hand is: what in particular do you find objectionable about the article, and how can we change it for the better? Let's get this back on track and find some way to collaborate on a better article. -Justin (koavf), talk 03:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  [personal attack removed - FrancisTyers 09:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

text:  Yeah, Polisario pledged to be little kittens. So did the fellows in Mauretania, and FLN at the time. The Moroccan government is hardly one of the most repressive governments in the world, I would add. Back in the old Man Hassan's day, yes. But hardly now. Again, activist agitprop glurge. I'm 'concerned' about factuality and generally irritated by people simplistically pimping unfactual political rubbish. (Collounsbury 03:42, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I have articulated at several reprises - your adoption of Polisario language, the very title is unsupported. But whatever, I will edit it to something factual. We'll have a fine time, [personal attack removed - FrancisTyers 09:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  [personal attack removed - FrancisTyers 09:41, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tenditious and Exagerated Language 

message: While the article title itself remains POV and unsupported, I conformed much more of the article language (for a quick edit) to underlying facts (as per, e.g http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE290032005 ) and removed Polisario POV characterisations.
===>Feel free to use the "Show Preview" button a maybe you won't write things like:
:The Independence Intifada... is a a Saharawi Polisario activist coinage...
or
:International coverage of the disturbances has been limited and Moroccan official sources have .
Needless to say, some of this has to be amended. -Justin (koavf), talk 04:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Needless to say I am reverting. (Collounsbury 05:14, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reducing POV language 

message: This is the Collounsbury version:
:The Independence Intifada (intifada is Arabic for "uprising") is a Saharawi Polisario activist coinage for a series of disturbances, demonstrations and riots that broke out in May 2005 in the Moroccan-held parts of Western Sahara. This event has also been called "The El-Aaiun Intifada" by the same sources. International coverage of the disturbances has been limited and Moroccan official sources have downplayed the events. 
I suggest this for a compromise:
:The Independence Intifada (Arabic, intifādatu-l-istiqlāl, meaning "independence uprising") is a Saharawi activist term for a series of disturbances, demonstrations and riots that broke out in May 2005 in the Moroccan-held parts of Western Sahara, and are still on-going as of March 2006. This event has also been called "The El-Aaiun Intifada" by the same sources. The term is controversial, and the Moroccan government maintains that the events are simply minor disturbances or troubles, with little political significance. It has accused the Front Polisario of instigating unrest, and propagandistically mislabeling it an "intifada". International media coverage of the disturbances has been limited.
"Sahrawi activist" I think is fine, since the relation of Polisario to this is not quite clear, just as in Algeria "Berber activist" can be used to describe unrest in the Kabyl (not necessarily "FFS" or "RCD activist").
If we later decide to change the name of the article completely, that will of course affect these paragraphs. But would the above suffice for now? Input requested from both Collounsbury & Koavf, and anyone else who's interested (Francis?). Anyone who can type Arabic script on their computer is welcome to fill that in, btw. -   Arre 04:54, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While I would prefer the notation of the particular party, I am okay with the edit as such. I would suggest w/o particaly insistence "independence" in an adjectival position to clarify (e.g. Sahraouie seperatist or something like that). The section on the Moroccan government position can be pared down to simply "the Moroccan government maintains the events are minor disturbances" for more conciseness.  (collounsbury 05:09, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collounsbury edit - 1st para 

message: I have added a sentence about the fact that every event whether it's in Sahara or Polisario camps is exploited by Morocco and Polisario as if it was a major event. Every side is trying to get the international press in its side, the Intifada word user by Polisario for what are very small event should be seen in this light, conversely Moroccan authorities have made a lot of noise for troubles that have happened lately in Polisario camps.--Kompere 16:00, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't seen this sentence anywhere in an article about WS, would you please care to show me some examples. how, what, when, where ? should I pass an exam just to be allowed to put my opinion in this article or what ? I could ask you the same thing for every sentence you put there ! . I believe that this article is very clearly biased and is merely regurgitating Polisarian propaganda, and I will do what it takes to make it NPOV. Anyway, I have put some pro Moroccan links to show that the war between Polisario and Morocco has now moved to the media, yours--Kompere 12:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propaganda War between Morocco and Polisario 

message: I have never read such a ridiculous article.
I don't even ever comment on articles.
But this just crosses the line.
I am not that experienced on the procedures inside Wiki.
So please can anyone start the deletion process for this?
Thank you in advance.
:will probably do. Lacking of reliable sources makes an article POV. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: the name is POV. used just by SADR sources. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: POV? If you have a better name, please let me know. Shall we also change al-Aqsa Intifada to something else? What about Holocaust? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:34, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Very funny. It deserves no more than "2005 protests in Western Sahara". You alone said, only Polisario sources used it, well that's a minority. I want reliable sources. Let me teach you: Holocaust isn't used just by Jews.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 19:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

text: go, put "independence intifada" in google. Just wikipedia and polisario websites come out. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 19:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: and more funny was when you put the category "conflicts in 2008": probably the most blatant unsourced thing on wikipedia. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 19:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Name again It needs to have some name and the name that was chosen by those who participated is just as good as any other as best as I can tell. If you think it violates WP:NPOV, put it up for WP:RfC. Repression and demonstrations are still occurring in 2008, so the category is relevant. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:36, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This again? Well it is clearly POV - frankly it's sad and pitiful Koavf pimps this, the opening paragraph regarding it being a Polisario coinage used among such sources seems good enough. Layoun 2005 riots would be more accurate, but he wants to pimp the dim and weak connection to the Palestinian Intefada. Whatever, not worth the argument. However, the adding of Conflicts in 2006-2008 strikes me as overreaching POV, as the riots were in 2005, a specific period.(collounsbury (talk) 00:13, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Smara There were uprisings in several places (e.g. Smara.) I have no problem with someone changing the copy of the article in the interests of NPOV, but "this article needs to be deleted" is sheer nonsense. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

text: No This article is not unreferenced, since there are references. Putting on that tag over and over again could earn you a block. If you want, you can put on - for instance -  or , but not , since it's not true. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs deletion 

message: Post facto, I do think the move by Fear God makes sense, given the Lebanese events are far better known (and rather better deserving of the label given the length of time and intensity, although American commentators seem to have gone with their label of Cedar Revolution rather than the more common ex-American Intefada label. (collounsbury (talk) 14:02, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Move 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Independence Intifada (Western Sahara). 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20071127145906/http://web.amnesty.org:80/report2004/mar-summary-eng to http://web.amnesty.org/report2004/mar-summary-eng
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090211075309/http://www.rsf.org:80/article.php3?id_article=15809 to http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=15809
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Second Sahrawi Intifada. 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/20060216114856/http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE290082005 to http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE290082005
*Added  tag to http://www.europarl.eu.int/omk/sipade3?PUBREF=-%2F%2FEP%2F%2FTEXT+TA+P6-TA-2005-0414+0+DOC+XML+V0%2F%2FEN&L=EN&LEVEL=1&NAV=S&LSTDOC=Y&LSTDOC=N
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060216114856/http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE290082005 to http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGMDE290082005
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) 17:50, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified