User talk:Tidjani Saleh

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Concern regarding Draft:Mohamed Ould Ghazouani 2024 presidential campaign

Hello, Tidjani Saleh. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Mohamed Ould Ghazouani 2024 presidential campaign, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:08, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Western Sahara Status

Hi

Could you look to reliable sources? And see if the article should be updated? Panam2014 (talk) 14:37, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Tagging @M.Bitton and @Sizito apart from @Panam2014 on here due to their involvement on the archived conversation)

Moroccan sources mainly cited are straight-up propaganda from the monarchy:

- Hespress is Morocco's largest newspaper and their line on Western Sahara is very clearly pro-occupation to the point of dehumanising Sahrawis.

- Morocco World News is described as a media tied to the Makhzen in its Wikipedia article, the name alone says enough.

- Le360 et al. belong to what's known as "Diffamation press in Morocco [fr]", which I think says enough.

Moreover, there have been incidents on the past related to Moroccan press/statements, the wildest of which being Kenya accidentally withdrawing a recognition for 24h due to some weird incident (see this report from Anadolu Ajansi).

I'd personally use only reliable international press or NGOs (Western Sahara Resource Watch is quite solid even if not the best of sources for Poland for example, their work is one of the main reasons we won a recent court case in the CJEU) on the page (like, seriously, what kind of source is "einnews.com"?), ideally statements coming from local press of the country claimed to support Morocco's claim or the ministry of foreign affairs of each respective country. I would reorganise the "support to Morocco's claims" on the following categories:

Has voiced some sort of support for Morocco's autonomy plan or the so-called "Moroccanity of the Sahara": in this category we can include countries that have either said that the Moroccan proposal is a "serious, credible and realistic" plan (most of Europe whenever they want to ease tensions with Rabat) or the Spanish extreme of calling it "the only serious, realistic and credible" plan. Not aware of an exhaustive list.
Has opened a consulate in the Moroccan-occupied territory (usually El Aaiún and Dajla): some Arab and African countries have done so in order to consolidate their ties with Rabat, not necessarily de jure recognising Morocco's sovereignity (see a non-peer-reviewed list for Dajla and El Aaiún; Morocco's propaganda site also includes one in this link).
Has recognised Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara: the countries that have directly declared de jure that Western Sahara is an integral part of the Kingdom of Morocco; so far only the United States (2020) and Israel (2023) have done so.

TL;DR: The article needs a huge rewriting to better adapt it for a constantly changing situation, will try to write a new draft but I'm afraid I am quite busy these days. I'm also working on a whole rewriting of the SADR article (click me) using an extensive amount of academic sources I have been collecting over the years (non-exhaustive list available on Bibliography) so the part on the political status is something I'll definitely be touching. Most (if not all) articles relating to Western Sahara/Frente Polisario/the Sahrawi Republic are of terrible quality with outdated sources and clearly written by people not informed enough on the conflict (at least to find details and sources from both sides) but I'm (slowly) working on it, my intention is to have it radically changed with as many serious, academic, peer-reviewed, trustworthy sources possible (me being *clearly* biased doesn't mean I want to ruin the quality of the articles relating to my homeland, as I hope my previous editing record is prove of).

Thanks for your interest in the quality of Western Sahara articles, I'm doing my best and have already the rough plans sketched (as I feel it's my personal duty as an English-speaking Sahrawi to help educate the world on my land, especially since Wikipedia is the first source virtually everyone checks for information on it) but it will take me time! Tidjani Saleh (talk) 20:34, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What you said about the Moroccan sources is certainly true, that's why, following a discussion about the sources that need to be used for such claims, we settled for using the official sources of the countries whose position is being cited. Sizito did a great job checking those that support SADR, but we never got to cleaning up the autonomy support part (btw, I did have a timid go at the list in the Western Sahara Autonomy Proposal). As for your proposal to reorganize the claims, that's something that needs to be discussed: I don't see the usual "serious, credible and realistic" political claptrap as supporting anything.

For the suggested improvement of the article: to err on the side of caution, I suggest a piecemeal approach to give others the opportunity to review what's being updated. M.Bitton (talk) 00:41, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid that the "political claptrap" is a still relevant statement to consider as it skews a country to support Morocco's stance, thus complicating a resolution. I'll see if I can check better sources by this weekend to check if the proposed categorisation works or not.

As per the article improvements, I assumed anyways that as per Wikipedia's participative nature that they would be peer-reviewed anyways. I'm just keeping it on my sandbox for now until I get a more conclusive rough draft, then will move it to a "Draft:" article and see what WP:Western Sahara may think about it! It will take me some time as I have a life and things to do but it is definitely something I'm constantly working on! Tidjani Saleh (talk) 12:50, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, so is the mention of "self-determination", "mutual acceptable solution" and countless others. For the rest, it's up to you, but just bear in mind that wholesale changes are almost always challenged, especially when dealing with contentious subjects. M.Bitton (talk) 13:05, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The general consensus is that "self-determination" and "mutually acceptable solution" are the "neutral" position, usually just redirecting to UN resolutions. Supporting the autonomy plan, even if with not many effects either de jure or de facto, shows the country is more interested in ties with Rabat than with the SADR and its allies.

We can maybe create a "third category" for said vague statements, will let you know by this weekend when I categorise everything! :) Tidjani Saleh (talk) 14:30, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Self-determination" is less neutral than describing a plan as a "serious, credible, et.". In any case, I don't have time for this right now and I doubt I will in the next few days, but like I suggested previously, this needs to be discussed in the appropriate venue. M.Bitton (talk) 14:41, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton and Tidjani Saleh: I suggest writing a draft, then we will see. Also, is such source being reliable? Panam2014 (talk) 15:18, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: Atalayar is a propaganda outlet that is financed by Morocco (it's also just repeating what was initiated by the Moroccan media). As for the claim, none of the concerned parties (SADR and Ecuador) has made any official statement about it (which one would expect in such circumstances). Please see International recognition of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic where some have already tried to change it. M.Bitton (talk) 15:26, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Do you have some source about Atalayar. So we could write an article or use it as argument to decide to not use it? Panam2014 (talk) 15:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some years ago, Morroco have claimed the same, then Ecuador's president have accepted letters from new Sahara's ambassador. Panam2014 (talk) 15:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton: and Europa Press? Panam2014 (talk) 20:45, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And this? Panam2014 (talk) 20:50, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: It's the same thing: a repeat of what has been instigated by the Moroccan media (without a single official statement by either SADR or Ecuador in sight). If there any truth to it, it will come out sooner or later.

Here's one of the sources about Atalayar (others can easily be found), though you don't need to use it as an argument in this instance since all it's doing is repeating an unsubstantiated claim. Unfortunately, since the Moroccan propaganda machine has a long history of making up all kind of claims, it makes it impossible to take their word at face value. M.Bitton (talk) 20:53, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton: TeleSur is unreliable as it is a Venezuela's propaganda outlet. And Venezuela recognizes the Republic. But the journalist have made good work in finding a tweet with a scan of the letter. So we could add the suspension of the recognition. Panam2014 (talk) 10:52, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TeleSur's coverage is highly favourable of the Sahrawi Republic/Polisario Front. Either way, Polisario doesn't really "flex" ties with countries without media having already got some good attention on it, especially Spanish one (see Colombia's recognition). Tidjani Saleh (talk) 11:09, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton and Tidjani Saleh: do you think we have enough sources to update the info? Panam2014 (talk) 19:37, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will check in a few days, I am busy and just check the talk page sporadically. Tidjani Saleh (talk) 20:31, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have been keeping on eye on the governments' websites and twitter accounts, and so far, no official announcement has been made by either party (none that I can see anyway). Let's see what Tidjani can find. M.Bitton (talk) 16:37, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: the article has been updated using this SPS source. M.Bitton (talk) 00:29, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton and Tidjani Saleh: as of yesterday, three countries have recongized Western Sahara as part of Morrocco : USA, Israel, France. Spain backs the plan. Panam2014 (talk) 14:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Panam2014: I already mentioned that Sanchez's unilateral decision was rejected by the congress (see this diff), and that he later on stated in his UN speech that "Spain supports a mutually acceptable political solution", without mentioning anything else, making its position ambiguous at best.

For France, I suggest you participate in this discussion. M.Bitton (talk) 15:11, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton and Tidjani Saleh: also, I think we should explain the fact, Sahraoui design both the people from Western Sahara (without including Morrocan settlers) and an ethnical group who lives in Western Sahara, Southern Morroco (internationaly recongized) and in Algeria. Panam2014 (talk) 13:22, 1 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton and Tidjani Saleh: Morrocan-aligned media caricatures Sahrawi activists and NGOs who support independence, denounce colonization, as "pro-Polisario". Do you have sources on this amalgam and examples of activists and NGOs who are not in reality Polisario? Panam2014 (talk) 13:14, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-independence Sahrawis are automatically assumed to be pro-Polisario, even if some are critical with the national liberation movement or operate autonomous separate organisations (see Équipe Media [es] or ASVDH). Tidjani Saleh (talk) 02:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton and Tidjani Saleh: Apparently, historians call the eastern part of the Sahara Desert “Western Sahara”. And this part until the Spanish occupation, it included part of Mauritania, southern Morocco and even Algeria. Do you have any information? Panam2014 (talk) 19:58, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That does not seem like correct information. Tidjani Saleh (talk) 22:52, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the name of the homeland of the Sahraoui people before Spain? Panam2014 (talk) 02:13, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend these two academic papers for a better understanding:

TL;DR: The regions of Saguia el-Hamra and Rio de Oro (and Zemmur, Tiris, Adrar Sutuf and Hamada among others, usually grouped in those two) correspondent mainly (and very roughly) to the homeland Sahel ('coast' in Hassaniya, aka the Atlantic Sahara) tribes of "Trab el-Bidhan" ("land of the Bidhan", Bidhan being the endonym for Hassaniya-speaking people).

There was no precedent supra-tribal structure, tribes were sovereign and coordinated via Ait Arbain (the council of the forty) when needing to coordinate supra-tribal and proto-state responses to foreign menaces.

Some of the Sahrawi tribes include the Reguibat, the Oulad Delim, the Tekna, the Laarousiyin, the Oulad Bu Sbaa, among many minor others. Tidjani Saleh (talk) 19:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Also, do you have sources about the frontline in the 70's? Panam2014 (talk) 18:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2003 election party affiliation

Hello. Just wondering where the party affiliations came from (the IFES source says they were independents). Cheers, Number 5 7 20:02, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, it's based on the fact that both were the leaders and founders of the political parties running. Presidential candidacies in Mauritania are candidate-based more than party-based (see the Constitutional Council's official list of candidates here). Political party's support is a de facto thing more than a de jure one, due to the highly personalist nature of Mauritanian politics (to illustrate, RFD is "Ould Daddah's party" and APP is "Ould Boulkheir's party" for most Mauritanians).

For a more solid source; please refer to: Lefghih, Cheikhna-Mohamedi (August 2024). الانتخابات الموريتانية في ظل دستور 1991 [Mauritania's elections under the 1991 Constitution] (Thesis) (in Arabic). University of Nouakchott Al Aasriya. p. 122 – via Al Jazeera Centre for Studies.; which names the "party" column "supporting parties" (Arabic: أحزاب المساندة, romanized: aħzāb al-musānida).

It lists the following for this specific election, but I have not fully used this document to mass re-edit articles since it's a mere overview thesis. It does list the original sources which I plan to check when I visit Mauritania, as I have enough direct "connections" to visit the National Assembly archives and what not.

Maaouiya Ould Sid'Ahmed Taya (whose article's "refurbishing" is a whole other story I don't have the time to deal with): Democratic and Social Republican Party; Rally for Democracy and Unity; Union for Democracy and Progress

Mohamed Khouna Ould Haidalla: Alliance of the Forces for Change (first time I hear of this movement in 2003, modern-day use is reserved for the RFD–UFP alliance) and Union of the Forces of Progress

Ahmed Ould Daddah: Rally of Democratic Forces

Messoud Ould Boulkheir: Action for Change (banned in 2002, so I assume People's Progressive Alliance?)

Moulaye Elhacen Ould Jeid: Mauritanian Party for Renewal

Aïcha Mint Jedaane: independent

The source cited is the Arab-language newspaper Echaab and French-language Horizons (edited by the Mauritanian News Agency) respective editions of 9 (only Echaab), 13, 14 and 15 November 2003. The bold number is the final result certified by the Constitutional Court and the normal font one is the provisional final ones announced by the Ministry of the Interior.

I hope that helps solve some doubts, I have decided to put the re-edition of Mauritanian elections articles on hold until I either visit Mauritania again or start working on my university thesis around 2026–2027, which will probably be related to politics in Mauritania and thus allow me to collect sources way more easily and with more time in hand. Tidjani Saleh (talk) 21:02, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for the comprehensive answer :) Number 5 7 01:08, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to you for asking, hopefully that was helpful! Tidjani Saleh (talk) 12:51, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Mohamed Ould Ghazouani 2024 presidential campaign

Hello, Tidjani Saleh. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Mohamed Ould Ghazouani 2024 presidential campaign".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:13, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:2023 Iraqi governorate elections

Hello, Tidjani Saleh. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2023 Iraqi governorate elections, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:07, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:51, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:2024 Mauritanian presidential election

Hello, Tidjani Saleh. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:2024 Mauritanian presidential election, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]