Jump to content

Talk:Foreign relations of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 65 external links on Foreign relations of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:55, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removing substantial sourced claims

[edit]

User:Underdwarf58 Why did you do this? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because the other foreign relations pages are like that too. Look at Palestine for example. Previously it had a way bigger list with countries that recognize Palestinian statehood and if either they maintain relations with it or not. But a few days ago, User:Semsûrî decided to simplify the list into the format used in the other pages. Because of this, I decided to the same thing for the SADR. Underdwarf58 (talk) 03:14, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article is not required to look like that one. Why not change that article to look like this one? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Look, I appreciate your perspective. The reason why I chose to simplify the list on the 'Foreign relations of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic' page is in order to align it with the formatting used in other 'Bilateral relations' pages for consistency and also because it is the last state to have that list. However, I understand that you have a different opinion on this matter.
Instead of changing the other article to match the same style, I believe it would be more effective to have a consistent format across all 'Bilateral relations' pages. This would ensure that readers have a cohesive experience when navigating between different articles.
Regarding me "removing substantial sourced claims", I at least kept the references for the suspended states because without them the list would be a little redundant. Underdwarf58 (talk) 05:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Changing the others to match this style would be a consistent format. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's what you think, but I personally disagree because it will make those articles longer to read. Plus it's too late because every other 'Bilateral relations' article have a list like I made for this article. If you think that's the case, go complain to User talk:Semsûrî or User talk:Akiro 2021 because they are also responsible for those lists, not just me. Underdwarf58 (talk) 06:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's not an opinion: if all the articles have the same style, that is by definition consistency. You're conflating an opinion and a fact here. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:20, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But like I said, it is already too late to change the other lists just as you like. Underdwarf58 (talk) 06:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any of them can be changed to anything. It is in no sense "too late". ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why not I undo my edit on this page so that I don't start a war here? Underdwarf58 (talk) 06:32, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, I will in no sense be edit-warring, nor will I revert at all, nor am I allowed to do so. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

[edit]

The Moroccan propaganda outlets have a history of making up all kind of nonsense about those that they consider as their enemies. If you believe that the information is true, then you'll have no problem finding an article that has been published by the African Union (which is more than capable of speaking for itself). M.Bitton (talk) 23:12, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The news is true, whether you like it or not! What you’re doing compromises the neutrality of this platform. Valorthal77 (talk) 23:18, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's not how Wikipedia works. If you think that it's true, then you'll have no problem sourcing it to the African Union. M.Bitton (talk) 23:20, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The difficulty of finding a source from within the African Union is beyond my knowledge and not my responsibility to determine where it can be found. However, Moroccan platforms would not risk highlighting or publishing unreliable news. The decision is not directly targeted at the Sahrawi Republic but applies to all entities that are not UN members! [1] Valorthal77 (talk) 23:20, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Moroccan sources have a history of making up nonsense about SADR (this is common knowledge to anyone who's familiar with the subject). M.Bitton (talk) 23:21, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is this ([2]) also a Moroccan website? Japan did not invite SADR to the summit with the African Union! Stop your behavior and put the news back in the article! Valorthal77 (talk) 23:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's reporting what a Moroccan website claimed. M.Bitton (talk) 23:28, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is filled with news sourced from SADR outlets. Quoting Moroccan news does not mean it’s propaganda, as you claim. I can’t believe we’re discussing such a matter. More Valorthal77 (talk) 23:32, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To source claims about themself (not others). Hespress is another Moroccan source. M.Bitton (talk) 23:34, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Stop your behavior what behaviour are you referring to? M.Bitton (talk) 23:29, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you don’t back down, I will escalate the matter. Valorthal77 (talk) 23:33, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's your prerogative. M.Bitton (talk) 23:35, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Valorthal77: what you're adding is factually incorrect (as it's contradicted by the AU). You're also edit warring and deliberately violating WP:ONUS (despite being aware of the policy). M.Bitton (talk) 00:12, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There’s no point in continuing this discussion with you. Valorthal77 (talk) 00:31, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025

[edit]

According to this source, the claim that Ghana suspended its relations with SADR has been made Morocco. I believe that both Ghana and RASD are perfectly capable of speaking for themselves and if the information has any merit, it wouldn't take long before either of them confirms it. M.Bitton (talk) 18:20, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Foreign_relations_of_the_Sahrawi_Arab_Democratic_Republic&oldid=1268212178"