Talk:Ba'ath Party

message: Shouldnt it be be "Ba'ath Party" - Bagel7
67.184.72.84 and 83.147.132.181 aka "Freedom Lovers" keep on vandalizing the 1st paragraph, as well as the Party Outside Iraq + Book References sections...
I think they should be barred from making further edits. - RazeYathrib
:Name is translated wrong, it is not Arab Socialist Ba'th Party, it's Arab Ba'th Socialist Party.  If we want a proper translation it should be "Arab Resurrection Socialist Party" or "Arab Awakenning Socialist Party" because this is what it translates to.  Arab and Ba'th are conncted, putting Socialist between them makes one assume that Ba'ath is referring to a political idology (similar to socialist) when it's not.  --Maha Odeh 08:05, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title 

message: All history of Iraq and Syria is very important.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.1.242.165 (talk) 07:17, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: The Modern Histroy of Baath? Is missing here

message: i wish you would talk about the CIA and its involvement in the Ba'ath party in the 1960s. this matter is a bit shrouded in mystery and debate, but most of it in the doldrums of obscurity rather than sunshiney public places like wikipedia.
I agree, and it should at least mention the CIA.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:anonymous  • contribs) 03:19, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  CIA involvement 

message: What is the actual meaning of the word "Ba'ath"? By that I refer mainly to its etymology. From what little I know of the language, I guess it has something to do with land. Sweetfreek 23:06, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It means "resurrection" and it's used in the Qur'an. Aflaq originally called his group "al-ihyaa' al-'arabi" which has the same meaning, though without the Qur'anic echo I think; it was Zaki al-Arsuzi who first called his organisation (or just his bookshop, depending on your source) "al-Ba'th al-'arabi". Palmiro 17:38, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins and Ideologies 

message: Insertions in this article demonstrate that not all editors are reading the text first. Wetman 18:37, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Editors not reading article first 

message: I noticed that in the "post saddam" section it states that there were "widespread but unreported protests", but this makes no sense. If they were unreported, how did the author know about them. This sounds like an attempt to fabricate facts, since we could try to verify the fact but will of course fail, because the protests went unreported. They must have been reported somewhere, I would like to see some documentation of this claim. AdamRetchless 05:19, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Post-saddam 

message: There is nothing wrong with and there is no policy against POV links on Wikipedia (as long as the link description makes a clear statement which POV is represented). External links are not endorsements of their content. See Wikipedia:External_links, Wikipedia:Make_articles_useful_for_readers and meta:When should I link externally. —Christiaan 01:33, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nothing wrong with POV links 

message: My understanindg has always been that as-Sa'iqa is an integral branch within the Syrian party, just as ALF is (was?) a branch of the Iraqi. Is that wrong? --Soman 06:56, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: All I've read about al-Sa'iqa has been in its context as a PLO member-organisation, and I don't recall seeing it referred to as a branch of the Ba'th party. If you're certain about it, feel free to change it back. Palmiro | Talk 10:42, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: To add some more confusion. I found a catalogue printed by PASSIA (like around 1999) listing ALF and a Palestian Baath Party (led by Jamal Bustami, in Nablus). Several websources seem to confirm that Baath and ALF are separate structures, although ALF is under (was?) the leadership of Baath. One source says Bustami's party is pro-Iraqi. Thus is fair to conclude that the Palestian Baath Party is the branch of the Iraqi-led party? --Soman 16:31, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

text: I suppose that sounds like a reasonable inference. PASSIA is probably as good a source as any for information on this sort of thing. Palmiro | Talk 16:46, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sa'iqa 

message: In a search confined to .edu domains, the results are as follows:
Ba'ath Party 982, Baath Party 21800, Ba'th Party 485
In a search confined to .ac.uk domains, i.e. United Kingdom higher education institutes, the results are as follows:
Ba'ath Party 127, Baath Party 136, Ba'th Party 56
This suggests that in the US at least, and for what it's worth, serious academic sources overwhelmingly favour Baath Party. Palmiro | Talk 18:30, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Restricted Google test

message: :::I suggest this page is renamed either "Ba'th Party" or "Baath Party" (I prefer Ba'th). Those are acceptable transliterations from Arabic, wheras "Ba'ath" is not. Why Ba'ath is used, I don't know - probably because it is hard to imagine how an apostrophe would sound before a consonant to most non-Arabic speakers, and probably also as a mixup between "Baath" and "Ba'th".
:::I now made a request to move this page. Arre 20:33, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed renaming

message: see http://www.elhadaf.net/ claims to be Arab Socialist Baath Party - National Command. has material from ALF, and image is from Sudan. Is this the "Iraqi" Baath Party? And what about http://b3th.jeeran.com, which also carries ALF material? --Soman 16:02, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  websites 

message: I just started the article General Federation of Trade Unions (Syria), and the source I used states that the union is closely related to the Baath Party in Syria. Would someone be interested in weaving (and expanding) that information into this article. I have no knowledge of the current affairs, and would do a pretty stilted job of it myself. --Bookandcoffee 00:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure how much information about that needs to go into this article; in the meantime, I'll see if I can find any sources to improve the article on the GFTU. Palmiro | Talk 19:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: General Federation of Trade Unions (Syria)

message: Is "Ba'ath" pronounced "Bath", or is it pronounced "BAAth"? Garr1984 16:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you speak Arabic, it's بعث. If not, then Baath is close enough. The letter that you probably can't pronounce properly (if you don't speak Arabic) is this: ع. You can read about it here: Ayin. Asabbagh 05:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation? 

message: Template: has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 15:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of [[:Template:{{ucfirst:PD-Old regime Iraq}}]]

message: Politics of Pakistan mentions a Pakistan Baath Party ((Syed Raheem Muhammad Abid al-Majid Muhammad Hussein al-Tikriti) with no data on the election. --84.20.17.84 09:28, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pakistan 

message: What was the difference between the two? I know that Nasserism was pro-Nasser and Egyptian whereas Baathism was Syrian/Iraqi. But what were the ideological differences? BillMasen 12:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: nasserism vs. baathism

message: The article may be accurate; however, the only book references do not provide chapter references and there are no external link references or even a references section. BingoDingo (talk) 15:27, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: In the paragraph about post-Baath Iraq, it says that baath members were banned from schools, universities, and the government after the US took control of Iraq. However, later in the same paragraph it says that non-Baathists were not allowed to become school principals and company leaders until the rules were slightly revoked in February  2008.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.224.169 (talk) 01:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Contradiction

message: , a 2007 document, is signed by three different baathist groups; Sudanese Baath, Sudanese Regional Socialist Arab Baath and Socialist Arab Baath Party Sudan Region. --Soman (talk) 13:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sudan 

message: I reverted back a merger tag on Arab Socialist Rebirth Party (Yemen). There are (at least) two baath parties in Yemen, the iraqi one and the syrian one. Is there any source on what happened to them post 2003? --Soman (talk) 08:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger of [[Arab Socialist Rebirth Party (Yemen)]] 

message: Ba'ath is the most common spelling used on the internet with the most hits on Google. I've synchronized all or almost all of the article to have this spelling.--R-41 (talk) 03:53, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use Ba'ath for the spelling of the name of the party 

message: gives some detail on the current positions of the two baath parties in Yemen, and names of their leaders. One is simply called حزب البعث العربي الاشتراكي whilst the other is called حزب البعث العربي الاشتراكي القومي. It doesn't say which one is the iraqi and which is the syrian, though. --Soman (talk) 15:58, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: lists both parties, with logos. --Soman (talk) 16:11, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baath in Yemen 

message: The following page is being considered for deletion: Ba'ath takes power in Syria and Iraq.  There maybe some salvageable material, so I include it here.
Ba'ath takes power in Syria and Iraq

In February 1963, the Iraqi Ba'ath took power after violently overthrowing Abd al-Karim Qasim and quashing communist-led resistance.
That same year, the Syrian party’s military committee succeeded in persuading Nasserist and independent officers to make common cause with it, and they successfully carried out a military coup on 8 March. A National Revolutionary Command Council took control and assigned itself legislative power; it appointed Salah al-Din al-Bitar as head of a "national front" government. The Ba'th participated in this government along with the Arab Nationalist Movement, the United Arab Front and the Socialist Unity Movement.
As historian Hanna Batatu notes, this took place without the fundamental disagreement over immediate or "considered" reunification having been resolved. The Ba'ath moved to consolidate its power within the new regime, purging Nasserist officers in April. Subsequent disturbances led to the fall of the al-Bitar government, and in the aftermath of Jasim Alwan’s failed Nasserist coup in July, the Ba'th monopolized power.
 
travb (talk) 22:35, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Article for deletion: [[Ba'ath takes power in Syria and Iraq]]

message: I just deleted the term Arab Fascism from the infobox, as describing the Baath ideology. I see that there has been an interesting debate about wether Ba'ath Party is actually fascist or not, but I can't see a clear result. Nowhere in the article itself the Party is labelled as fascist, nor does it appear under Fascism. Nor it is clear what exactly "Arab Fascism" could be. So I think we can't use the term in the infobox - if someone wants it back, no problem: get a good source and integrate in the text a clear reference to why Ba'ath Party should be labelled as Fascist. As long as the text doesn't say it, the infobox shouldn't say it.--Ilyacadiz (talk) 21:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fascism 

message: “75.172.106.52” keeps on vandalizing this article with his tired ‘Nazi’ canard cum faux references: the FACT is most US and European historians (unlike say Fox News or the Jerusalem Post) believe that the Sorbonne-educated founders of the Baath Party (both born and raised in Damascus when Syria was part of the French colonial empire) were mostly influenced by center-left French socialism and “Jacobin” patriotism. 
Even Marxist-leaning liberals such as professor Hanna Batatu, a harsh critic of the Baath Party, believe that Aflak’s ideology is mostly a third-worldist revival of French Jacobin political thought...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by RazeYathrib (talk • contribs) 13:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nazism?? 

message: "In 1955 a coup d'état by the military against the historical leadership of Michel Aflaq and Salah Bitar led the Syrian and Iraqi parties to split into rival organizations – the Qotri (or Regionalist) Syria-based party being aligned with the Soviet Union, while the Qawmi (or Nationalist) Iraq-based party adopted a generally more centrist stance.[1]"
This sentence in the introduction needs clarification. Does "centrist" in this case mean an unaligned position in relation to the US and the Soviet Union? Or does it mean between the "left" and "right" of politics? Also the date 1955 is mentioned nowhere else in the article, which I find decidedly odd. Is it actually a reference to the 1966 coup in Syria?
--82.0.66.100 (talk) 10:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  1955 Political Split 

message: I have trimmed the lead to eliminate repetition, non-lead information and add some more pertinent information. --BoogaLouie (talk) 21:05, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Trimming lead

message: This doesn't even need an explanation. A party whose sole motto is "Unity, Liberty, Socialism"? A party that was founded to revive the ORIGINAL political Left of the Jacobin era? Right-wing, please.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.28.16.254 (talk) 02:07, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed "Right wing" 

message: I'm giving notice to the Wiki community that I will be working on a separate article (but will link to this article) about the US de-Ba`athification policy in Iraq as part of a class project through the Wikipedia Public Policy Initiative. Amfarr21 (talk) 18:34, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  De-Ba`athification Entry 

message: Could someone please add the IPA for Baath? I'm never entirely sure about how to pronounce this. Thanks Akerbeltz (talk) 17:16, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: There appears to be a Ba'ath movement in Tunisia now. --Smart (talk) 04:30, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There has been at least one Ba'athist group in Tunisia for decades, linked to Iraq. They used to be based in exile, and publish 'el-Ba'th'. They kept a rather low profile, but have emerged in public after the 2011 revolution. They use the name 'Ba'ath Movement', rather than 'Ba'ath Party', that might be due to Tunisian legislation. There are loads of Facebook pages of this group. --Soman (talk) 05:23, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tunisia 

message: Greetings!  I am happy just to be copy-editing and am still reading the Wikipedia style guide. Phrases like "although it has only ever held power in Syria and Iraq" (paragraph 2) seem ambiguous (i.e., imprecise in meaning). --CousinJohn (talk) 22:45, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In government, in other words, ruling the country. --TIAYN (talk) 10:23, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is really meant by "in power"? 

message: 1. By "but became so antagonistic" do you mean that the two factions (Iraq- & Syria-based) came to be at odds with each other? Just making sure of what you mean to say. 
 : Didn't write that sentence, but yes, it's refering to the two ba'athi cells. --TIAYN (talk) 00:32, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Didn't write this sentence either; Iran as a whole, Iranians are not Arab. --TIAYN (talk) 00:32, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification on paragraph 3 

message: Its definition in the first sentence of the article really makes that sentence difficult to read. Then it has another fuller definition under the "Founding and early years" section. Why don't we try defining it up top *after* that first sentence? We can give that a go, and you can decide whether you like it or not.
:The ideology section is a mess, it's some work, not only grammatically, but also in regards of factual accuracy! --TIAYN (talk) 10:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: British English! :) --TIAYN (talk) 10:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

text: British English should be used. British English forms the basis of English as spoken in multiple countries: the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Nigeria, South Africa, etc. American English is only used in the United States.--R-41 (talk) 22:50, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Ba'ath is defined twice. What do you say we just define it once?

message: We have both in various places. We should ultimately pick one just so that the article is consistent, as called for in the Manual Of Style. This can wait.
:British English! :) --TIAYN (talk) 10:17, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: British English should be used. British English forms the basis of English as spoken in multiple countries: the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Nigeria, South Africa, etc. American English is only used in the United States.--R-41 (talk) 22:50, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Use British English, American English, or?

message: Hey Trust! Thanks for addressing those tags; I hope I didn't go overboard with them. Let me explain my reasoning with some examples:
* "However, in the three inner-factions of the Ba'ath Party..." The organizational structure was well explained in an earlier section, but I didn't know if "factions" referred to that, or to something else. It seems like there were three cabals within an upper-level organizational tier? In the Regional Command? (I am mortified that I let "Hhowever" slip through!)
* In the section The Syrian Ba'ath Party organisation, there's a line: "With the collapse of the pan-Arabist state, the United Arab Republic (AUR)..." And another later on: "supported joining the pan-Arab state (UAR)." I tagged that because I didn't know if AUR was different from UAR, or if it was a typo.
* "Later that year, the Ba'ath Party leadership were planning to assassinate Qasim." Were they in the midst of their planning later that year? Or was the killing to take place later that year? I was going to change "were planning" to "planned" but I realized it could change the meaning of the sentence, like so: "They planned to assassinate him later that year." Since I didn't know exactly what it meant, I tagged it. Also, what year?
Some other questions I had:
* Should ba'ath always be capitalized?
* Should the first a in al-Hafiz (or a similar name) be capitalized when it appears at the beginning of a sentence?
* I thought parts were kind of link-heavy. Manual of Style/Linking
That's all for now. I'll finish up in the next day or so. Thanks again for your help. Cheers.Braincricket (talk) 20:26, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  January 2012 copy edit 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:19, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Hafez al-Assad.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ba'ath Party. 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/20121222114159/http://www.humansecuritygateway.com:80/documents/CTC_EmbattledInArabia_ShiisAndThePoliticsOfConfrontationInSaudiArabia.pdf to http://www.humansecuritygateway.com/documents/CTC_EmbattledInArabia_ShiisAndThePoliticsOfConfrontationInSaudiArabia.pdf
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 06:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Ba'ath Party. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20050203235613/http://baath-party.org:80/eng/constitution.htm to http://www.baath-party.org/eng/constitution.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 00:23, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article could do with a good copy edit. I've therefore tagged it for the attention of the GOCE.  BroVic (talk) 17:19, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copy edit recommended 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ba'ath Party. 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/20120310042933/http://www.tunisia-live.net/2012/01/04/tunisian-baath-party-celebrates-5th-anniversary-of-saddam-husseins-death/ to http://www.tunisia-live.net/2012/01/04/tunisian-baath-party-celebrates-5th-anniversary-of-saddam-husseins-death/
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) 09:45, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Namely, the over 2 decade rule of Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the still continuing and multiple decade long government in Syria, which the government was officially considered to be by members of the Ba'ath Party.  Somehow this article doesn't mention that this party ruled countries, and the only mention of these leaders in the article is about before they came to power.  The article about the Iraq branch was purged in much the same manner, skipping the entire time period when Saddam was in power from the chronology of the party in the article.
Clearly this was done by someone with some sort of political agenda (though I don't understand exactly what that agenda is), and should be rectified, as it removes the most significant implications of the effects of this organization from the record.--108.86.123.83 (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone scrubbed the most important information of all from this article 

message: Very smart person Wiki Munif (talk) 11:21, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Munid 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: moved per ngrams evidence. --   JHunterJ (talk) 11:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The discussion above is closed.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
===Post-RM===
 Are you sure this wasn't closed prematurely? The last comment was just today. Charles Essie (talk) 21:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

text: The usual 7 days went with only one oppose, and that based on that editor's experience rather than any of the usual reliable criteria. So, yeah, pretty sure. -- JHunterJ (talk) 00:45, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No, as stated it was based on the fact that the British media tends to use Ba'ath and so WP:RETAIN probably applies. You should know that Ngrams and Google hits are not the be all and end all of RMs. It should have been relisted. -- Necrothesp (talk) 01:18, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: When stated, there was no indication that your experience with the British media usage was a broader fact. No type of evidence is the end all be all of any discussion, but in this case no counter evidence was provided, just a "my experience" note. -- JHunterJ (talk) 01:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I quite clearly stated that the British media tends to use Ba'ath. Something you seem to have ignored. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:17, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

text: Agreed. Do you the RM discussion should be reopened? Charles Essie (talk) 20:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

text: The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: Consensus to move.  This determination of consensus makes no comment on the merit of the previous closure, as move review is where that should happen.  (closed by non-admin page mover)  SITH (talk) 11:36, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

text: I invite you to participate. Charles Essie (talk) 19:54, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The above discussion was closed in a timely fashion. That you claimed it was premature does not make that true. -- JHunterJ (talk) 20:08, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That may be, but the fact remains Google hits are not reliable evidence. No one uses punctuation in Google searches and "Ba'ath" is used by more reliable sources (the ones mentioned above). Charles Essie (talk) 22:20, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

text: The discussion above is closed.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
===Post-RM administrative issue===
After determining the consensus of the above discussion I realised two of the listed articles are sysop-move protected and I have therefore been unable to move them, please could an admin move them?
* :Baath Party → 
* :Arab Baath → 
Further, given the page move logs of some of the other articles listed, there have been quite a few reverted undiscussed moves in the past, perhaps an admin could review whether some articles from the set above require further move protection or unprotection as the case may be?
Many thanks, SITH (talk) 11:46, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

text: , I've lowered the move protection on all four pages to ECP, so you should be able to enact these. – bradv🍁 02:09, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks , all done now.  SITH (talk) 15:00, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 16 October 2020 

message: Are you sure this wasn't closed prematurely? The last comment was just today. Charles Essie (talk) 21:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The usual 7 days went with only one oppose, and that based on that editor's experience rather than any of the usual reliable criteria. So, yeah, pretty sure. -- JHunterJ (talk) 00:45, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No, as stated it was based on the fact that the British media tends to use Ba'ath and so WP:RETAIN probably applies. You should know that Ngrams and Google hits are not the be all and end all of RMs. It should have been relisted. -- Necrothesp (talk) 01:18, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: When stated, there was no indication that your experience with the British media usage was a broader fact. No type of evidence is the end all be all of any discussion, but in this case no counter evidence was provided, just a "my experience" note. -- JHunterJ (talk) 01:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I quite clearly stated that the British media tends to use Ba'ath. Something you seem to have ignored. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:17, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

text: Agreed. Do you the RM discussion should be reopened? Charles Essie (talk) 20:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Post-RM

message: After determining the consensus of the above discussion I realised two of the listed articles are sysop-move protected and I have therefore been unable to move them, please could an admin move them?
* :Baath Party → 
* :Arab Baath → 
Further, given the page move logs of some of the other articles listed, there have been quite a few reverted undiscussed moves in the past, perhaps an admin could review whether some articles from the set above require further move protection or unprotection as the case may be?
Many thanks, SITH (talk) 11:46, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I've lowered the move protection on all four pages to ECP, so you should be able to enact these. – bradv🍁 02:09, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks , all done now.  SITH (talk) 15:00, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Post-RM administrative issue