Talk:Caprivi conflict

message: Compared to its length the article already offers quite some references. To "prove" that entity X is not popular among group Y is difficult and imho does not warrant a "citation needed" notice, particularly as it has never been contested, not even here. 
I will add some more content and references, and then take the template out --Pgallert (talk) 11:37, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  refimprove Template 

message: I did some research, and it is classified as an ongoing conflict. I provided sources and everything. It's just not a very big or important one. 62.72.110.11 (talk) 09:59, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi. Your source doesn't say it is an ongoing conflict, and there hasn't been any military action in Caprivi ever since Jonas Savimbi was killed and UNITA retraced back into Angola. Could we, for the sake of not getting into an edit war, keep your statement of an independent Caprivi with its source, add that this nation is recognised by no-one, and put the end of the conflict back to 1999? --Pgallert (talk) 17:15, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It does. It's listed in the "current conflicts" section. But hey, why let the facts get in the way of good story. I'm outta here, this place blows.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.72.110.11 (talk) 13:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

text: yeah, I don't even touch the issue of reliable sources - by now we have a paramilitary forum and a quote from Phil ya Nangoloh from NSHR, even that one out of context. I however appreciate your willingness not to insist on your version. Add a bit of good faith in other editors and I shall call it sad that you won't stick around. Cheers, --Pgallert (talk) 20:10, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Great! As you seem to have insider knowledge, I would appreciate if you could have a look at User:Pgallert/Caprivi Treason Trial. I'm still trying to connect the bits and pieces about this, that's why it is still not in the official article space. --Pgallert (talk) 10:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copied from [[User:Pgallert]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Caprivi conflict. 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/20080912225427/http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAFR030022000?open&of=ENG-NAM to http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAFR030022000?open&of=ENG-NAM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101206184941/http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AFR42/001/2003/en/90997a91-d6f2-11dd-b0cc-1f0860013475/afr420012003en.html to http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AFR42/001/2003/en/90997a91-d6f2-11dd-b0cc-1f0860013475/afr420012003en.html
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:27, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This paragraph still seems to ruffle feathers occasionally:
On 7 October 2002, the Itengese nation severed all ties with Namibia and declared the independent, sovereign Free State of Caprivi Strip/Itenge their national homeland. This nation is not recognised by any other government, though, least of all Namibia.
Currently, an IP is probably waiting out the WP:3RR cooldown period to make another revert of the last sentence because it doesn't have a source. It doesn't have a source because, except the paramilitary forum  nobody noticed this "declaration of independence". Itenge is not a recognised country. Itenge is not even an unrecognised country, see here. So I don't have a source because no one even bothers to state that it is not recognised.
I suggest to remove the paragraph altogether, for the reason that globalsecurity.org is not a reliable source for international diplomacy. Comments? --Pgallert (talk) 07:32, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free State of Caprivi Strip/Itenge