Portal talk:Western Sahara/Intro

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Koavf contradicting himself

Koavf, you are the founder of the WS Wiki Project. Nice job, YOU wrote that

  • The goals of this project are to Standardize terminology related to Western Sahara/SADR Ensure that pages use the terms "Western Sahara", "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic", "Sahrawi", and "Polisario" correctly.
  • "Western Sahara" is a region in Africa. It was formerly known as "Spanish Sahara", and is made up of Río de Oro and Sakiet el-Hamra. This region is known as the Southern Provinces in Moroccan literature; see also provinces of Morocco. The Kingdom of Morocco does not administer the entirety of the territory; the rest is known as the Free Zone. Please not that many sources will use the term "Western Sahara" to refer to the government the "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic", just as "France" refers to "French Republic".

Why are contradicting yourself? :) Daryou 22:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

===>Not a contradiction

Please not[e] that many sources will use the term "Western Sahara" to refer to the government the "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic", just as "France" refers to "French Republic". Justin (koavf) 23:36, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
You said that the goals of this project are to Standardize terminology related to Western Sahara/SADR and Ensure that pages use the terms "Western Sahara", "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic", "Sahrawi", and "Polisario" correctly. And you defined "Western Sahara" as a region in Africa. You advised WP readers that many sources (you didn't say WP) could use the term "Western Sahara" to refer to the government the "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic". That is contradiction: you request to use terms correctly but you don't follow your own advise. And you didn't provide your souces. Daryou 23:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Compromise

Hey again. Daryou asked me to come and mediate this dispute before it turns into an edit war. Justin, do you mind? If you both accept I'll start work on it now. Please indicate acceptance below. - FrancisTyers 20:50, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Daryou - I accept Daryou 20:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Koavf - I'll accept conditioned on two things: 1.) we leave the page as is (i.e., the way I wrote it) until the issue is resolved, and 2.) I reserve the right to still edit anything that Daryou writes, if for no other reason than grammar and spelling. The rational for the first point is that there is no point in requesting mediation while an edit war is going on, and Daryou is the one who has the burden of proof to change the Portal.
Eminently reasonable. You of course have the right to edit anything he writes as he has the right to edit anything you write. I agree the burden of proof is on him and that the page should stay as is until this dispute is resolved. Daryou, do you accept these terms? - FrancisTyers 21:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
I accept to stop the edit war until we find a consensus. Daryou 22:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Koavf

Western Sahara is alternately the name of a disputed region in northwest Africa that is currently under military occupation by Morocco and the conventional short-form name of the government in exile Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR). Colonized by Spain from 1884-1976 as Spanish Sahara, the process of decolonization was never completed, and the native population, the Sahrawis, did not exercise their right to self-determination. A nationalist group known as the Polisario Front has fought Spain, Morocco, and Mauritania for independence. A guerrilla war with the Polisario Front contesting Rabat's sovereignty ended in a 1991 UN-brokered cease-fire; a UN-organized referendum on final status has been repeatedly postponed. Today, 45 governments across the world recognize the SADR as the legitimate government in Western Sahara. Furthermore, some intergovernmental organizations, such as the African Union include it as a member, but not the United Nations. Several thousand Sahrawis live in refugee camps in Tindouf, Algeria. The region is split between the Moroccan-controlled majority, and the section administered by the SADR.

[edit] Daryou

Western Sahara is a territory in North-Africa which the legal status and the issue of sovereignty are unresolved; the territory is contested by Morocco and Polisario Front (Popular Front for the Liberation of the Saguia el Hamra and Rio de Oro), which in February 1976 formally proclaimed a government-in-exile of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), the term "Western Sahara" is used by pro-polisario souces to identify this self-proclaimed government. Colonized by Spain from 1884-1976 as Spanish Sahara, the process of decolonization was never completed, and the native population, the Sahrawis, did not yet exercise their right to self-determination. A guerrilla war with the Polisario Front contesting Rabat's sovereignty ended in a 1991 UN-brokered cease-fire; a UN-organized referendum on final status has been repeatedly postponed. The nationalist group known as the Polisario Front has fought Spain, Morocco, and Mauritania for independence. Today, 45 governments from what was called the third world recognize the SADR as the legitimate government in Western Sahara. Furthermore, the African Union include it as a member, but not the United Nations. The region is split between the Moroccan-controlled majority, and the section administered by the SADR, and several thousand Sahrawis live in refugee camps in Tindouf, Algeria.

[edit] Areas in agreement

  1. Western Sahara is a[n] area/territory in North-Africa.
  2. Western Sahara was colonized by Spain from 1884-1976 as Spanish Sahara, the process of decolonization was never completed, and the native population, the Sahrawis, did not yet exercise their right to self-determination.
  3. A guerrilla war with the Polisario Front contesting Rabat's sovereignty ended in a 1991 UN-brokered cease-fire; a UN-organized referendum on final status has been repeatedly postponed.
  4. A nationalist group known as the Polisario Front has fought Spain, Morocco, and Mauritania for independence.
  5. Today, 45 governments from what was called the third world recognize the SADR as the legitimate government in Western Sahara. Furthermore, the African Union include it as a member, but not the United Nations.
  6. The region is split between the Moroccan-controlled majority, and the section administered by the SADR.
  7. several thousand Sahrawis live in refugee camps in Tindouf, Algeria.

[edit] Disputed areas

  1. Western Sahara is currently under military occupation by Morocco.
  2. Western Sahara is the conventional short-form name of the government in exile Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR).
  3. The issue of sovereignty is unresolved; the territory is contested by Morocco and Polisario Front.
  4. The Polisario Front in February 1976 formally proclaimed a government-in-exile of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR).
  5. The term Western Sahara is used by pro-Polisario souces to identify this self-proclaimed government.

[edit] Evidence

1. According to Amnesty International, the area is under military occupation [1]:

The vast majority of those still "disappeared" are Sahrawis, arrested in the main during the first few years of Morocco’s military occupation of Western Sahara.

1. According to JUAN SOROETA LICERAS, Professor of International Public Law of the Universidad del País Vasco of Spain, the area is under military occupation [2]:

One of the parties, Morocco, was a military occupier that wanted to exploit the resources of a Territory, and the other was the people of that Territory, who had a right to self-determination.

1. According to FELIPE BRIONES, International Association of Jurists for Western Sahara, the area is under military occupation [3]:

Western Sahara, he said, being a territory under military occupation, was therefore subject to the parameters of international human rights and the application of article 47 and subsequent articles of the fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, to which Morocco had subscribed since 1957. The fact of the status of Western Sahara as a territory under military occupation was evidenced by the ceasefire and the deployment of MINURSO forces.

2. According to the CIA [4]:

Western Sahara          
conventional long form: none
conventional short form: Western Sahara
former: Spanish Sahara

3. According to the CIA, the legal status and sovereignty are unresolved [5]:

legal status of territory and issue of sovereignty unresolved; territory contested by Morocco and Polisario Front

4. According to the CIA, the Polisario front proclaimed a government in exile [6]:

Polisario Front (Popular Front for the Liberation of the Saguia el Hamra and Rio de Oro), which in February 1976 formally proclaimed a government-in-exile of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR)

[edit] Requests

Sources that state:

  1. Western Sahara is not under military occupation.
  2. That the conventional short form of the SADR is Western Sahara.
  3. Sources that state that legal status and sovereignty are resolved.
  4. Sources that state the Polisario Front has not proclaimed a government in exile.


  1. The UN and the Minurso are mediating in the conflict and are the most reliable and neutral source about the issue. The word "occupation" and "occupied" are never used in Minurso and UN reports. Daryou 22:42, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
    That does not mean that the area is not under military occupation. I asked you to provide sources that state that "Western Sahara is not under military occupation". Just because they don't use the words doesn't mean they don't agree with them. - FrancisTyers 22:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
    Actually, the UN don't use the terms because they have to comply with neutrality principles as they mediate in the conflict. They use instead terms like "reintegrated" (between "). WP should use similar wordings as WP is supposed to be a neutral and unbiased source of information. Daryou 23:00, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
    No, the Wikipedia is supposed to present the facts from a neutral point of view. This is a subtle difference. The UN has to be neutral, the Wikipedia has to present a neutral point of view. A lot of the time these two coincide, sometimes they don't. Please don't argue and either present your source that says "Western Sahara is not under military occupation" or don't. - FrancisTyers 23:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
    Some evidence: [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]: this last site says that Morocco administers and controls WS. By the way, Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom and is recognised as such by the international community including the Republic of Irelandis; Is there any reliable source that says that "Northern Ireland is not under military occupation"? Daryou 16:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
    Do you have a reliable source that says Northern Ireland is under military occupation? e.g. Amnesty, HRW, some experts in International law? - FrancisTyers 16:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
    There is many sources that say that Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom and is recognised as such by the international community including the Republic of Ireland, but it is very difficult to find a source that says that it isn't under Military occupation. By the same way many reliable and neutral sources say that Morocco controls and administer the territory. Those terms should be used in WP to comply with neutrality. There is also many sources that say that Moroccan territorial integrity should be respected (see above) Daryou 16:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
    Hi, please read carefully what I write. I asked you to find a reliable source that says Northern Ireland is under military occupation. Then we can make a comparison. Until the time that you find a reliable source for the above, my initial question stands. I have found several reliable sources that state Western Sahara is under military occupation. You have found no sources that say Western Sahara is not under military occupation. Please do not reply to this thread any more unless you answer one of these three questions. You are not helping resolve this dispute. - FrancisTyers 17:02, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
  2.  ?
  3.  ?
  4.  ?

[edit] Compromise text

1. The territory of Western Sahara is under Moroccan control and administration. Amnesty International and a number of experts in international law characterise this control as military occupation.

I accept it as a compromize only if Koavf accepts it. Daryou 17:18, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I would accept it, if it was included into my text, replacing the appropriate passage, and if it was re-worded something like this: Most of the territory of Western Sahara is under Moroccan control and administration. Amnesty International and a number of experts in international law characterise this control as military occupation. The remainder is under the administration of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. Something like that, which acknowledges the fact that Morocco does not control the entire territory, only that north and east of the Moroccan wall. Otherwise, that's fine.Justin (koavf) 19:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Sounds good to me, and this is definately in the context of the agreements above (that is, your original text). Now for points 2-5! :) - FrancisTyers 22:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What the hell

What the hell is going on here, where was this discussed? Daryou, can you please explain your change here. With reference to the in progress mediation. - FrancisTyers 16:54, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand where is the problem? I added exactly:
  1. "The legal status of the territory and the issue of sovereignty are unresolved; the territory is contested by Morocco and the Polisario Front (Popular Front for the Liberation of the Saguia el Hamra and Rio de Oro), which in February 1976 formally proclaimed a government-in-exile of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR). At present it is largely controlled and entirely claimed by Morocco as an integral part of its territory (source CIA factbook)
  2. And one intergovernmental organization: the African Union include it as a member, but not the United Nations nor the Arab League: I've corrected an error, SADR is member of one intergovernemental organization only.
I've added NPOV facts, what's the problem, don't I have the right to edit this page or what? Daryou 17:04, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
It would have been appropriate given the situation to make a note on the talk page requesting further input before you make an edit. This isn't about right/not right, its about being polite and trying to edit harmoniously. This is a very contentious issue and although I don't dispute your edits, please take into account the consequences of your actions before you follow them through. If you had left a note on the talk page, perhaps we could have discussed it like rational human beings and avoided this little revert war. - FrancisTyers 17:39, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Justin, what complaints do you have with his additions? - FrancisTyers 17:39, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I apologize, I just added facts and I didn't think that it would make any problem. I think also that blind reverting isn't polite too, Koavf could leave a note without resorting easily to edit war. Daryou 17:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Agree, but lets be gracious here ;) - FrancisTyers 17:53, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Radical changes

Please stop As you can see above, the text was made with an admin mediating a long conflict. If you want to change the text, please propose changes and then see if we can find some kind of middle ground. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 06:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The article has been updated by half a dozen editors since then. One of them is Nickbrooks, who made the major edit. Nickbrooks has been on a geological mission in Western Sahara in the east of the berm. He was with the Polisario front guerillas, and when he came back from the region, he went on editing the article to what he saw as a very neutral approach to the conflict. So, again, please stop this nonsense of reverting to a nearly two years old version.--A Jalil 08:41, 5 October 2007 (UTC)