Talk:Cedar Revolution

message: I see merit in both User:Riccati's edit and User:220.233.68.197's.  The problem is that both the inclusion and exclusion of the data could be considered POV.  IMO, to attribute the claim to the international media (where it was reported) is as neutral as we can get - at least that way it's not WE who are making the claim. David Cannon 12:08, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comparative sizes 

message: Regarding Fox...
Why is Fox News called a propaganda? Why? Are you saying that Fox News has no informative analysis? Assuming, Fox News is biased, what of CNN and Al Jazeera? All forms of media have their own quirks. Is the media station only perceived biased when one does not approve the delivery of the news? Just curious. I had a hand in writing the Rubinomics page before with a few experts as a guide, but a group of objective individuals overpowered my months' work just because it sounded like Fox News, and I am reluctant to work on the Rubinomics article again. I am neither left or right but I want to hear everyone's voice, but I guess there really is a systemic flaw here regarding NPOV. Gosh, so many people regard Fox News negatively without even understanding true media professionalism.
Regarding the article...
Mention the data, and where the source came from, and the stand of the source. That would about do it. Humble Guy
* hey HumbleGuy: Sorry to hear about your troubles editing Rubinomics. The Cedar Revolution article is not the place to debate the biased-ness (or not) of Fox News. Check out FOX news and Talk:FOX News to fully examine the diverse views on this matter. Quoting Fox News and Al Jazeera as sources are as ok as initial news sources, but if the wikipedia article selectively includes and excludes facts (even if they are not, strictly speaking, false) to convey only part of the story, then people WILL call it POV.  (oops here's my ID a few days later MPS 00:54, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Curious 

message: After discussion on this page I feel that listing the goals of the Cedar Revolution is a very useful thing.  I used the site that 500LL recommended; those six goals show what many Lebanese consider needs to happen in order for the revolution to be over.Yuber(talk) 22:53, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want to include a section on what that specific website lists as the goals, that might make sense, but it certainly doesn't belong in the introduction.  Nor do your musings about what it is or when it might stop.  That website isn't the Cedar Revolution. Jayjg (talk) 09:45, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There needs to be something about the goals, if you want to create a goals section right after the introduction then go right ahead.  That version isn't POV by any stretch of the imagination.Yuber(talk) 10:36, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

text: One website isn't going to give you the goals, if they can be encapsulated at all, and in any event it doesn't belong in the opening paragraph.  The current version is actually quite NPOV; it's not clear what you specifically object to.  Regardless, including your POV musings about what the Cedar Revolution is all about can only make POV issues worse. Jayjg (talk) 14:31, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If it's not clear what I specifically object to, then how is it clearly POV?  I was merely noting the accomplishment of the main goals of the Cedar Revolution.  As for commodore, Cedarrevolution.net is a Lebanese protestor website.  It is pretty credible.Yuber(talk) 01:06, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Who is it associated with?  There are various "Lebanese protesters" -- whose goals are these specifically?  I'd be more comfortable with more sources cited in this section if we are to keep it.csloat 05:49, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it claims to be speaking for both Lebanese Christians and Muslims.  Although the picture of Gemayel on the homepage leads me to think it's coming from a Christian point of view...Yuber(talk) 10:37, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Why was the version considered POV?

message: Well, elections are over.  Any objections to the removal of the template?Yuber(talk) 01:10, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of template

message: Concerning the Gucci revolution claim "The BBC also named it the Gucci revolution in reference to the large number of upper class protesters."
I did not merely google the claim as you did, I had a look INSIDE the pages that were hit by google. For example:
Some people here are jokingly calling the phenomenon "the Gucci revolution" - not because they are dismissive of the demonstrations, but because so many of those waving the Lebanese flag on the street are really very unlikely protestors. 
To make you understand my point: if the BBC says that Ben Laden called George Bush an idiot, this doesn't mean that BBC is calling George Bush an idiot. The BBC never called the "cedar revolution" the gucci revolution. It just reported than someone else did.
Take a closer look on the google results--equitor 03:17, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:The new version is looking like this now:
::The BBC reported that some in Lebanon jokingly refer to it as the Gucci revolution in reference to the large number of upper class protesters.[6]
:While this joke actually existed (I use to tell it myself) I still disagree why an anonymous joke on an historical event should be mentionned. People joke on all political events, and it's not usually mentionned in wikipedia. Thousands of jokes were told during the clinton-lewinsky affair, not one is mentionned in the Lewinsky_scandal article. Moreover plenty of jokes were told on the Hezbollah demonstration, yet none is mentionned (which is absolutely normal). There's specialized magasines for reading jokes and it's also possible to work on a future wikipedia sister project called wikijoke but wikipedia is not the place for this.--equitor 09:46, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
::I think you're right, the "Gucci Revolution" is only used in internet forums, I don't think it was widely used in the media. CG 10:16, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
:::BBC is not an "internet forum."  This is a joke but it is a relevant joke that was used by significant numbers of people at the time -- probably more than used the rather silly "Cedar Spring" -- and it was not just a "joke"; it was a relevant comment on the revolution that clarifies how it was perceived by certain groups of people.  I'm going to put it back in.--csloat 04:00, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think that I ever read a joke in the october revolution article, the French revolution, the Hungarian revolution etc... This is an obvious attempt to bash the content of an article on partisan opinion and I will not accept it.--equitor 06:49, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Slow down.  I don't have much of a partisan opinion on the "Cedar Revolution" to speak of, so you can't say I am trying to bash the content of this article.  The claim was not just a joke; it was a relevant social commentary.  If such commentary exists for the French revolution that you know of, feel free to add it to that page - I certainly would consider it relevant.  It is quite notable that people joke about these events in this way and that many don't take it seriously as a "revolution."  The name of it did come from the US Department of State, after all, so it's not even surprising that there was this reaction by some.  It's not like it's from some guy's blog; it was reported by BBC.  But look don't paint me as pro-Syrian or something because I think this line is relevant.  I'm going to let others comment before I add it back, but I think it should be in the article.csloat 08:18, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No the claim is not a relevant social commentary, it's a joke, that is not even relevant. As I pointed before, I never saw an encyclopedic article on a revolution that contains jokes. And no, I will not add any the jokes I know on any revolution because they are irrelevant. Finally, it is your right to take your informations from Mr. Abou Khalil's blog, a man who advocates the dismantlement of Lebanon, but I doubt that it makes you neutral. I am not saying it's wrong but that you can't present yourself as NPOV. It is of course a recognized wikipedia right to be partisan, your claims only need to be relevant rather than neutral.--equitor 17:24, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it is both a joke and relevant social commentary.  I am not saying any joke is relevant, but one such as this certainly is; as I said, it was likely used much more than the "Cedar Spring" reference which is mentioned in the article.  The point is that many people were skeptical of the "revolution" and this joke is very telling in terms of why.  I'm not sure why Abu Khalil is relevant here; I did not bring him up here - the source is BBC.  Please do not distort that.  If I wanted his opinion in this I would have included the claim calling it the "hummus revolution".  Also the fact that I read that blog does not mean I agree with everything he says.  I did not say I was "neutral" -- nobody is -- but I do not have a strong opinion about the "Cedar Revolution."  And I do not advocate the "dismantlement" of Lebanon, whatever that is, nor am I pro-Syrian, or anti-Cedar-Revolution, which seemse to be your implication.  In any case my point is this is relevant not as a joke but as social commentary that many appear to have used (even yourself by your own admission).--csloat 17:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, I never said (nor implied) that you were advocating the dismantling of Lebanon. Concerning Mr. Abu Khalil I was referring to your comment below and not above. Still, the Gucci revolution is not a relevant social commentary. Private conversations on politics happens all the time, and unless there's a public issue at stake, they shouldn't be on wikipedia. I do not understand why a private 'social commentary' is relevant. To my knowledge, the description is never used in Lebanon (and elsewhere) except on a few blogs, it's really a minor joke (like plenty of other jokes) that was reported once in a BBC article. Gucci revolution is no more relevant than 'hummus revolution', meaning it has no place here.--equitor 17:25, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: BBC is not a "private conversation."  It is a public news source, and it reported that the term was used in Lebanon, regardless of whether you personally heard it there.  It was probably used more than "Cedar Spring", which certainly has been put in this article.--csloat 22:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

text:  I'm not a fan of putting this joke. Like equitor said, this joke is practically never used in lebanon. Do a search in google and you find that most of the links point out to non-lebanese blogs. The term must have originated from the BBC report, but I really would like to know the sources of this report, since no lebanese press have used this term. So, as for my opinion, this joke mustn't be used in this article. I'll take the opportunity to highlight a NPOV issue in the article. The Cedar revolution isn relatively far from what the article describes. It's not a lebanese POV that is represented but an American POV. I'm not sure, but you seemed, Equitor, that you live in Lebanon, and you must have witnessed the big downfall that happened after the revolution, which is not cited. Even the "opposition" name must be defined. And the 2005 election weren't regarded as fully democratic by a great number of lebanese. And the big paradoxes that are happening aren't well documented. People often mistakes American POV with Lebanese POV as opposed to Syrian POV; but in fact, their are all different POVs. CG 18:40, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: What evidence do we have about its use in Lebanon other than the BBC report, which says it was used?  I would like to know the sources of the BBC report too but that is original research - I think it is fair to say here that this is what the BBC reported; I would not assert in the article anything beyond that.  The other points you make are well taken and I think these things should be included in the article too.  I am not trying to enforce a particular POV here; I just think it is strange that people react so negatively to including a relatively mild criticism of the event that was cited in a BBC report.  I was not the one who originally put it in there but it seems entirely relevant to me that the revolution was criticized in this manner.--csloat 22:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I never said that nobody used the qualification. This is not the point. It's a minor joke and it's irrelevant. You might as well add humus revolution or ninja demonstration (in reference to the veiled women in the Hezbollah demonstration). --equitor 16:56, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gucci revolution 

message: I am looking at the following paragraph:
:Lebanese Druze leader Walid Jumblatt remarked to a reporter of the Washington Post, "It's strange for me to say it, but this process of change has started because of the American invasion of Iraq. I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, 8 million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world". In this sense, the Cedar Revolution may also prove to be a dividend of the Bush administration's global war on terror, however, as stated previously, Jumblatts views are not entirely respected as they seem to change regularly. Indeed, Middle East Media Research Institute, a media monitoring service, recorded him saying "The oil axis is present in most of the U.S. administration, beginning with its president, vice-president and top advisers, including [Condoleezza] Rice, who is oil-colored, while the axis of Jews is present with Paul Wolfowitz, the leading hawk who is inciting (America) to occupy and destroy Iraq".
It seems to me that Jumblatt's views here are distorted; while they may change often, the first interview quoted is a view that he has specifically renounced; apparently he has been consistent about it since, and the WP quote makes it sound like he sometimes supports the occupation, which is definitely not the case.  This is what Abukhalil writes in response to Hitchens using that quote in his debate against Galloway: "He also cited Walid Jumblat's ONE interview with David Ignatius shortly after the assassination of Rafiq Hariri (Jumblat's friend AND patron) when he cited the American war on Iraq as a source of inspiration, and he referred to it as if this IS the position of Jumblat. But Jumblat later renounced and denounced that one interview, and has given tons of interviews and speeches against the US war and occupation. Just today, Jumblat's party issued a statement in which they attacked Zarqawi's murders but supported 'Iraqi resistance'."  I think either this quote should be removed entirely or it should be contextualized; the way it sounds now is completely misleading.csloat 03:54, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that this is correct but I am familiar with Mr. Abu Khalil weblog and his relentless racism and bashing against the Lebanese people. So when it comes to Lebanese issues, don't take his holy word for granted.--equitor 06:45, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know his work that well but I have not seen anything I would characterize as "relentless racism and bashing against the Lebanese people."  He was born in Lebanon which makes me suspect such bashing would be unlikely.  I have seen what I would call bashing of American and Israeli foreign policy, but that hardly constitutes racism against Lebanese.  I don't see any reason to distrust the above comments (and apparently you agree?). -csloat 00:58, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: When I read titles like 'the falsity of Lebanese culture' I cannot but wonder. I still remember his 'I am opposed to Lebanon as a project'. The guy wants to dismantle Lebanon (it's his right of course), because like all Arab nationalists he's opposed to its existence. This pseudo-nationalism is based on racist myths about the inhabitants of the Middle East. The fact that he was born in Lebanon changes nothing. Just look at Bobby Fisher or Walker Lindh, the American taliban. Anyway, this is out of topic here. His article is here: As`ad AbuKhalil--equitor 16:56, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounds like he is an anarchist, not a racist.  I don't know his work that well but I have read one of his books and I sometimes read his weblog.  I have seen a lot of his bias - he is very opinionated - but have not seen any "pseudonationalist" sentiment.  In fact it seems to me he does not like nationalism very much at all (which makes sense as an anarchist).  I am not certain I have seen him refer to himself as anarchist before but it seems vaguely familiar and the comments you cite prove it.  Anyway you're right it's off topic I just wanted to understand your charge that he was "racist". --csloat 22:28, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a misunderstanding here. I did not use the term racist in the popular American meaning (saying that one race is superior to another). He's an Arab nationalist, and most of them (but not all) consider that Arabs are one nation sharing the same ancestors (this is called an ethnicist/racist definition of nationalism, and it's an academic term that is not pejorative) . To tell the truth, I don't know Abu Khalil's position on this point. The Arab nationalist movement has several variants. --equitor 04:08, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jumblatt's comments 

message: What is the objection to this template? This article is all bout the politics of Lebanon and mentions politicians, elections and political parties a great deal. --AladdinSE 04:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A History of Lebanon template would be more appropriate for this article. CG 22:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, but it's really not suitable. Every history article (like wars, revolutions) has extensive information about politics. But politics templates are about governement, and political structure of a country and not for historical events. CG 17:09, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see any problem with it.  I'm reverting. —Viriditas | Talk 03:56, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I give up. I don't want to start a revert war, so I'm leaving this template. CG 17:24, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you find a guideline or policy page that supports your position? —Viriditas | Talk 22:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a policy or a guideline issue. I just think that in one hand politics templates are not for historical events. And in the other hand, every historical event concerns politics (Lebanese civil war, Syrian presence in Lebanon...) but these articles don't have this politics template. CG 23:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Politics of Lebanon template 

message: Just to be pedantic, the correct form is "second anniversary", "third anniversary", "fourth anniversary", etc. The "ann-" prefix means year, so saying "x-year anniversary" is redundant.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.214.15 (talk) 15:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Two-year anniversary", "three-year anniversary" 

message: I have tagged this section as POV push for not citing any sources.  Please introduce some reliable sources to build up the section. - Humaliwalay (talk) 09:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fourth Anniversary  

message: All the photos are from 2006, long after the "Cedar Revolution" protests, so either they should be removed or the captions should mention this. FunkMonk (talk) 04:54, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading pictures 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Cedar Revolution. 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/20050421001846/http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/story.jsp?story=619657 to http://news.independent.co.uk/world/fisk/story.jsp?story=619657
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050412000120/http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au:80/common/story_page/0,5744,12813616%255E2703,00.html to http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12813616%255E2703,00.html
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 12:12, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Cedar Revolution. 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/20080609104746/http://www.allacademic.com:80/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/5/1/5/0/p151501_index.html to http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/5/1/5/0/p151501_index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070216003654/http://news.yahoo.com:80/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon
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 21:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Cedar Revolution. 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:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:10, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Cedar Revolution. 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/20130314202513/http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=7326 to http://www.aljazeera.com/me.asp?service_ID=7326
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070216003654/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon to http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070214/ap_on_re_mi_ea/lebanon
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111007212503/http://www.aknews.com/en/aknews/4/224847/?AKmobile=true to http://www.aknews.com/en/aknews/4/224847/?AKmobile=true
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) 14:12, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Cedar Revolution. 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/20071008044423/http://beirut-online.net/portal/article.php?id=1359 to http://beirut-online.net/portal/article.php?id=1359
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0%2C5744%2C12813616%5E2703%2C00.html
*Added  tag to http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=721&e=1&u=%2Fnm%2F20050306%2Fwl_nm%2Flebanon_hizbollah_dc
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080323232401/http://gs.14march.org/ to http://www.gs.14march.org/
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) 16:12, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cedar Revolution. 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/20070519191231/http://yalibnan.com/site/gallery/ to http://yalibnan.com/site/gallery/
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) 03:38, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The Cedar Revolution is the most common designation in the West, but the orginal Lebanese name for the events was Intifadat al-Istiqlal (the Independendence Intifada). I think that both names should appear in the lede, as it does in the Arabic sister-page.  Jokkmokks-Goran (talk) 23:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Revolution or Intifada