Talk:Ogaden National Liberation Front

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Ethiopia, an attempt to co-ordinate articles related to Ethiopia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Low This article is rated as being of low importance.
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

[edit] How to discuss this page?

I'm new to wikipedia. Bayantree I would appreciate if you told me how to make constructive changes to this article. Because it is extremely filled with bias view. I want to make changes I don't know how to contact you to tell you all the things wrong with this article. In fact there are just too many to mention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkfarah (talk • contribs) 01:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mkfarah, First there is a hierarchy of sourcing on Wikipedia. Content that has no citations (aka footnotes) is considered worse than content with citations, while, for citations, peer reviewed sources are better than mainstream publications, which are better than blogs or smaller partisan presses. You have been removing content with citations in favor of content without citations, which is reverted as a matter of course.
I recommend that you start small and improve a particular paragraph that you feel is unbalanced. This can be done either by using more reliable sources or by noting that the wording of the Wikipedia content is not supported by the given citation. For example, if a sentence is supported by a small press with a partisan agenda but contradicted by the BBC then, generally speaking, you can simply change the citation and reword the sentence to that supported by the more reliable source. If you cannot find a better source explicitly debunking a content you think is wrong, leave the sentence alone. The onus is on you to prove that content with sources is erroneous. Given that you have not yet done this sort of detailed editing, it is impossible to take your assertions of widespread imbalance at face value.
Long-time Wikipedia editors with established reputations as knowledgeable and experienced in their particular field of editing can on rare occasions make appeals to their credibility when editing uncontested topics, but your account doesn't have nearly the background needed to make a "I know better than this source but can't prove it right now" sort of assertion. Thanks, BanyanTree 02:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
i have a problem with the citations. In the paragraph "Somali death" or victims of the ONLF you cite TPLF allegations against the ONLF. you put that citation first and it reads "onlf throws grenade into crowd" (come on.... isn't that bias) considering that the ONLF refuted the allegation. NO real proof exist to connect the ONLF to that tragedy. The onlf has repeatedly claimed that the TPLF threw the grenades at the public to later blame it on the ONLF. This is the TPLF's strategy to put the ONLF on U.S. terrorism list. but it's not a terrorist organization. You almost paint a picture of a terrorist Organization not that of a liberation organization. your presentation and your sources are very very bias. Furthermore, the OHRC isn't connected to the ONLF at all. The OHRC has repeatedly refuted this allegation yet you and company present that as being true. You present no evidence of the linkage. Further, you don't talk about how the ONLF tried to succeed from Ethiopia threw referendum. You don't mention that at all. I would request that you make SERIOUS changes to the article because from reading it, I could swear it was hand written by meles zenawi himself.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkfarah (talk • contribs)
First, please sign your posts. You can either type four tildes (~s) yourself or click the button on the topic of the edit window that looks like a signature.
Second, we don't have a company. Wikipedia is a not for profit organization that is run almost entirely by people volunteering their time.
Third and most significant, you still don't seem to understand content disputes are largely resolved by using reliable sources. Make your assertions in the article using sourcing. Pick one paragraph and try to improve it, including by offering counterpoints to assertions that you feel are misleading. If you can't do that, then there is very little hope that anyone would entrust you with rewriting the whole article. - BanyanTree 12:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Terrorism?

User:Mkfarah removed the {{WikiProject Terrorism}} template from this talk page. I think this should have been mentioned either on this page, or in the edit summary. Having said that, I'm not sure the ONLF article qualifies for inclusion (without even getting into problems with the term "terrorism" itself). From what I can tell, inclusion in WikiProject Terrorism is based on an article being listed at List of designated terrorist organizations. That list, in turn, cites MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base as its source. But that web site indicates that the ONLF has not been designated a terrorist group by the US, the UK, the EU, Canada, Australia, or Russia. But the WikiProject's threshold for inclusion is not clear to me, so as of right now, I don't have a problem if this article is not included. (And I guess I should mention that I'm only referring to the article, and not my own views about the group itself, which do not belong here in any case.) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm an established skeptic of labeling organizations "terrorist", by some fluke managing to get Category:Terrorist organizations deleted many moons ago after becoming annoyed at the people whose only edits to various African rebel group articles was adding them to the category. I'm not familiar with the WikiProject but, for what it's worth, am ok with removing the tag. - BanyanTree 04:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality of this article in dispute

I'm very concerned about the neutrality of this article. It is EXTREMELY unevenhanded. There are a lot of so-called external sources missing. The anti-ONLF sources all seem to be Ethiopian Goverment websites and/or known affiliates thereof. There is an extreme lack of historical content. A particular "source" that I visited actually wasn't even a report it was a bloc. This is utterly disturbing. I'm challenging the neutrality of this page because it is clearly anti-ONLF and PRO-TPLF. There is no mention that the ONLF was a participant in the june 1991 conference in Addis Ababa that saw the transitional charter come to effect. There is no mention that the TPLF (EPRDF) stormed the town of gabri dahar in 1995 killing 81 people in their vein attemt to assasinate the ONLF political leadership. There isn't a mention that the so called Ethiopia constitution provides the framework for a political referendum to see succession but that the TPLF has steadfast denied the people of the Somali State to exercise that right. Furthermore, all of the TPLF's claims seem to be repeated in this article as being confirmed/true and the ONLF's claims are labelled as "allegation" "accusations" etc. This is dangerous manipulation of the English language. This article needs SERIOUS SERIOUS reworking. I'm going to work on it. And let you folks judge the differenceMkfarah 01:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Mkfarah, I have just done you (and the article) a favor and tagged the article with {{NPOV}}. If you are able to attribute sources that corroborate what the TPLF did do, and/or what the ONLF did not do, then feel free to add this information to the article. Since October 5 (when you posted these comments), your edits merely consist of deleting, then restoring, then again deleting a quote and its source. In the meantime, you left yet another rant on my talk page accusing me of supporting the TPLF. I think everyone here is interested in improving the article but, speaking for myself, you give very little (if any) incentive for wanting to help you in your efforts. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:41, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, it appears that we have left the discussion stage of the dispute. Anyone else for removing the POV template until someone who can improve an article, as opposed to rant about how bad the current version is, shows up to make an argument? - BanyanTree 08:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

74.210.98.82 09:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC):::BAnyantree i would gladly contribute to this article but I don't have much time. I see that i'm competing with full-time TPLF agents probably working from Mekelle. I is clearly bias. There is no doubt about it. I could give Phd Thesis, books online essays, news article, all CREDIBLE AND REAL sources including the new york times, LA times, Voice of America, BBC, doctors without borders, UN, OHRC, Human Rights Watch, Red Cross, Newsweek Mag, etc etc. But who cares about these sources right we have Washington based lobbyist Peter Pham to speak for the TPLF and HE is cited as the "credible" source. There is no mention of the ethnic cleansing that's going on in the Ogaden, there is no mention of the TPLF's occupation of Badme, a UN declared Eritrean village, No mention of the TPLF invasion and occupation of a sovereign state. In the article it's said as "Ethiopia's entry into the conflict in Somalia" So i figured I can't spare nearly as much time so i'd just let people know that it's lies. Everything in this article is a lie. If you don't believe what i'm saying go visit the articles about the following groups and you'll see a common trend: Coalition for unity and democracy, Oromo Liberation Front, Ethiopian people's patriotic front, ARDUF, tigray people democratic movement, Union of islamic courts, and much more. You'll discover that TPLF agents sit on their monitors all day and night and spread this bullshit propaganda all over the web. It's part of new "information ministry's" program of western deception. Go to youtube and what i'm saying to you will become evident. I mean by western standard we're more media literate and you'll be able to tell that it's staged propaganda. i just wanna put it out there that this article is a lie. it's pretty late. 74.210.98.82 09:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Haha! <sarcasm> I have been elevated to the level of "full-time TPLF agent"! I feel honored. </sarcasm> If you wish to fix the problems in the article, go ahead, but do not just put a huge message in it saying that it is pure propaganda. Thank you. --Mark (Mschel) 09:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
You have been blocked for vandalism and your credibility is zero. Does someone who is not a vandal have an opinion? - BanyanTree 09:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I do not see any POV, so unless we find some, I say 86 the tag. --Mark (Mschel) 09:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I personally think the article could use some work in terms of balance, but right now I have zero (or less) motivation to work on it (see my previous comments on this page). Given the anonymous user's threat ("you're not gonna stop me… tell everybody i know to do the same thing.… i'm gonna make this your full time occupation"), I suggest that we semi-protect the article should another round of similar edits occur. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 13:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I guess I'm in the same boat. I only watch this article because it vaguely related to my work on Ogaden War and I thought that the user would actually edit, as opposed to ranting about how bad everything was and then accusing us of being part of a vast conspiracy. This certainly is not my first priority for updating. OK, the POV tag stays until someone who is motivated and capable of basic editing practice shows up.
I would recommend a block on sight policy for similar rants and then semi-pro as a last resort. Cheers, BanyanTree 19:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello everybody. I'm not ethiopia but I have a friend from Ogaden. I live in Ontario, Canada. I have recently become aware of the ONLF struggle with Ethiopia. I did some priliminary research into the conflict and from what I have learned Ethiopia is a colonial power in the region. The power base in Ethiopia has largely been dominated by a minority northern ethnic groups (the abbysinians largely). This is the same nation that invaded Ethiopia and assumed the name of the former (as a sort of political umbrella). This article lacks the historical depth to explain the reason behind the ONLF's struggle to liberate the Ogaden from Abbysinian occupation. I would like to add that this article is without any doubt in mind riddle with racial undertones and bias views. It is not factual in it's historical accuracy nor is it balanced in it's presentation of the present situation. I just wanted to say that because it is something that need to be worked on seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.88.67.230 (talk) 23:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

This article contains contaminited stories that are not true. For instance reference (12-16) to the section " Ogadenia confusion" has nothing to do what have been writting in the section. It's not Somalis belonging to the Ogaden-clan or ONLF this matter who nnamed the region "Ogaden". The region was called Ogaden well before the Abbassian occupeid. The person who wrote this section called it "southeast Ethiopia" and thereby he/she what been writting in history books. This section bee deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anfaal (talk • contribs) 22:42, 29 October 2007

Anfaal, the "Ogadenia confusion" section is indeed problematic. However, given the contention surrounding this article, removing the entire section as you did with no meaningful edit summary nor talk page comments quickly aroused suspicion; after five such unexplained removals, you found yourself blocked. It would be inaccurate to say that the entire section and its sources are false, but I agree it has been presented in a very biased manner. The Alpeyrie source (itself an opinion piece) does not claim that "the ONLF labeled the whole Somali region 'Ogadenia' in reference to its Ogaden sub-clan that makes up the highest percentage of the region" - in fact it does not even mention the word "clan" (the citation itself is ironic, given Alpeyrie's pro-ONLF bias). The Telegraph article does mention the Ogaden clan, but says it makes up "about half" of the local population. A previous editor conflated the two labelings of the area as "Ogadenia" and "Ogaden"; the latter is very common among different maps, and predates the existence of the ONLF (example: 1972 map). But some editor(s) cited several maps that use the "Ogaden" label, and claimed the ONLF influenced this labeling; this is inaccurate. I do suspect bias on the part of the editor(s) responsible (it might be a different matter were these maps actually labeled "Ogadenia"), but in any case, it was inaccurate and I've removed the references. (I was also suspicious about someone labeling a URL with "Divisions and anti-ONLF sentiment among local Somali population" rather than the title of the article, which is " Ethiopia's 'secret war' forces thousands to flee".) At the same time, I am not sure that Ogaden's borders have ever been even informally defined, but I am quite positive it is inaccurate to say that the Somali Region and Ogaden are one and the same (the latter actually lies within the former); a BBC map did make this mistake but, again, to attribute this to the ONLF is inaccurate (if I'm wrong, then we need a source that corroborates the ONLF's influence upon mapmaking). On the other hand, it is true that not all of the area's inhabitants hail from the Ogaden tribe and the naming of the area vs. the name of a particular clan does warrant mention, thus I have left part of the section in place rather than completely remove it. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I just did a little more work. I've removed the Alpeyrie source and I provided more information about how the area is labeled on maps. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

One thing I'd like to add, speaking as a frequent contributor to articles about Ethiopia & the neighboring countries, is that I frequently fall back to quoting TPLF (& Ethiopian official) sources is not because I believe them uncritically (although in some cases I do) but because I can't find anything else that fits under Wikipedia's guidelines. We need a source that anyone else can examine to support assertions in Wikipedia articles: books, magazine articles, websites, etc. I know that there are other sources out there, but due to limits on my time, I can't always examine them, let alone know that they exist. I also know that in some cases the material does not exist in the West, so I try to be understanding & lenient. If you care about the subject, please help identify these sources & bring them to our attention -- either by linking to them in the article, or posting about them here. Or even better, try to help integrate that information into the article, while leaving a pointer to where someone else can find it. -- llywrch 23:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Gyrofrog: Thanks for your wise comment. And i'm sorry that have violate the rule of the wikipedia by remove the hole section, i was not aware that rule. I now have edited and I assume that eding is allowed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anfaal (talk • contribs) 20:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Coming back to this: Anfaal's edit added unattributed text, some of which duplicates what was already in the section. The Mohamed Mohamud Abdi citation would seem to be his opinion (or in any case, it appears that way, as presented; I haven't seen the text) so I have clarified that this is his assertion (irrespective of whether I agree or disagree with it). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)