![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
The article's title may need to be changed from 2011 Horn of Africa drought to 2011 Horn of Africa food crisis or 2011 Horn of Africa famine if its contents focus on the humanitarian effects of the drought rather than its meteorological causes. -- Arjuno ( talk 03:19, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
I nominated this article for the In The News section on the main page. Chime in here. Jim Sukwutput 07:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
I see no mention of Eritrea as being affected - I note incidentally that the map does seem to have eritrea shaded (which is probably correct) as I would be surprised if Eritrea were unaffected
Something to add to the article might be that the US government apparently asked Eritrea to reveal the info on tuesday according to this.
While this says PBS news report that Eritrea is affected.
I also wonder about other adjacent countries/autonomous regions Puntland and Somaliland are they suffering "famine" as defined by the UN (or not?). I think this the article could probably do with a better map (though that will probably be hard to sort out). EdwardLane ( talk) 16:46, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
There's a dubious claim in the Humanitarian situation section that is falsely attributed to unnamed reports by World Vision International. The claim goes "According to reports by World Vision International, families are agreeing to give their daughters as young as 13 in arranged marriages just to earn money from the dowry so that they can purchase food". It purports to be sourced to this news article, but the news article does not say this. It instead quotes a pedestrian claiming that this is what some people are doing: "Fatuma Ahmed sat at sunrise frying thin maize pancakes that will be the only food she and her seven children would eat that day. She told of how "in the dark because people don't want others to know", families are agreeing to give their daughters as young as 13 in arranged marriages just to earn money from the dowry."" What one pedestrian claims in passing is not World Vision International's writ and also clearly fails WP:REDFLAG. I have thus removed it. Further down in the International response section, there's another phrase, this time a direct quote from the UNHCR humanitarian coordinator for Somalia, that asserts that he and his organization at the moment ""do not have all the resources for food, clean water, shelter and health services to save the lives of hundreds of thousands of Somalis in desperate need"". This is mistakenly attributed to this article by CNN, when it's actually taken from this article from the Guardian. Some of the other material in the Wikipedia article also looks somewhat doubtful; so if independent editors who have not contributed significantly to the article could evaluate it, that would be great. Middayexpress ( talk) 22:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Assuming current levels of response, famine is expected to spread across all regions of southern Somalia in the next 1-2 months.[1]
As of late July 2011, however, the famine appears to be restricted to the Bakool and Lower Shabelle regions of southern Somalia according to the U.N.. Despite this, Bowden warns that, given the low crop yields and outbreaks of infectious illnesses caused by the prolonged drought, famine could expand to also affect the remaining regions of southern Somalia within a period of two months.[18]
Given the low crop yields and outbreaks of infectious illnesses caused by the prolonged drought, and assuming current levels of response, famine is expected spread across all regions of southern Somalia within a period of two months.[1][18]
I took off your first sentence because 1. We just mentioned that UN declared a famine in the two regions in the previous paragraph; 2. The definition of this famine is by U.N. definitions and according to U.N. data only; their data can be up to two weeks late, which is not a reflection of what actually happens. Given this, it's possible to say "U.N. declares a famine in certain regions", but not "a famine exists in certain region only". Thoughts? Jim Sukwutput 23:44, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
The article seems to have been prematurely appended "famine". According to the UN humanitarian coordinator for Somalia, Mark Bowden, there's an actual famine going on in only two regions in the country, not the Horn of Africa as a whole. He warns, however, that it could spread within a few months to the other regions in southern Somalia if he and his organization don't get the relief supplies that they require for their operations. Middayexpress ( talk) 22:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
"When a significant majority of English-language reliable sources all refer to the topic or subject of an article by a given name, Wikipedia should follow the sources and use that name as our article title (subject to the other naming criteria). Sometimes that common name will include non-neutral words that Wikipedia normally avoids (Examples include Boston Massacre, Rape of Belgium, and Teapot Dome scandal). In such cases, the commonality of the name overrides our desire to avoid passing judgment (see below). This is acceptable because the non-neutrality and judgment is that of the sources, and not that of Wikipedia editors. True neutrality means we do not impose our opinions over that of the sources, even when our opinion is that the name used by the sources is judgmental. Further, even when a neutral title is possible, creating redirects to it using documented but non-neutral terms is sometimes acceptable; see WP:RNEUTRAL."
Just a note that some of the figures in the article are from last week and are probably out-dated, especially the figures for humanitarian assistance from different countries and NGOs. If anyone has seen newer numbers, please update. Thanks. Jim Sukwutput 01:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
The child in the photo under "Humanitarian situation" has two left feet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.245.254.46 ( talk) 13:09, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
I am still wondering what caused User:Jim Sukwutput to revert my last two edits to this article. I have searched through MOS:ABBR (which, as far as I can tell, is the relevant page here, not the main MOS page as this user provided in the reversion edit summary) but I have found nothing there that disputes my edits. Certainly, there's nothing in there about having half an article say "UN" while the other half says "U.N." And, besides, I don't see how this edit does anything but clarify a potentially confusing passage. Bobnorwal ( talk) 14:31, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
To head off at the pass any future revisions, I'll stake my (rather small) claim here.
Bobnorwal ( talk) 22:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
It's perfectly sensible to include links to humanitarian groups, but link to the main page about the issue. Linking to a special donations page which has a special url has caused problems in the past in which a 'look alike' site has substituted their own link to get the money and credit card details. That's why I changed the Unicef link. There's a 'Donate now' link on that page, but there's no question it's the official Unicef site because it starts with www.unicef.org 75.60.18.64 ( talk) 17:55, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
This article has been nominated to appear on the In the News section on the main page again. Right now there seems to be some disagreement about which particular development we should post or whether we should make this a sticky. Any opinion will be much appreciated. Jim Sukwutput 19:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
The Al-Shabaab group has issued a statement responding to some of the news reports alleging that it has banned food aid distribution. On July 5, 2011, the group's spokesman Sheikh Ali Dhere indicated that his organization had no issue with allowing both Muslim and non-Muslim individuals from helping the drought-impacted people as long as those groups harbored no ulterior motives in doing so. Dhere added that his organization believes that many aid agencies are exaggerating their relief requirements so as to satisfy their own selfish objectives. He also suggested that the actual nature of many of the relief operations are twofold: first, some of the aid workers are in effect attacking as "spies", while others, including the UN, he charged of harboring a tacit political agenda not in keeping with what they claim to be doing. In addition, Dhere alleged that aid agencies that are providing assistance in neighboring countries are attempting to siphon away the various Muslim peoples of Somalia in order to more easily indoctrinate them into Christianity. Al-Shabaab members have been reported to have intimidated, kidnapped and killed some aid workers, leading to a suspension of humanitarian operations and an exodus of relief agents [3].
That said, the part of the text above regarding Al-Shabaab's specific charge that the UN and other relief organizations have "a political agenda, doing nothing like what they were claiming" -- which, for some odd reason, was removed from this article -- has been re-added. Middayexpress ( talk) 23:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
I have partially restored the original layout that was modified during a series of major, undiscussed changes to the article. The image that was added to the infobox in the FEWS map's place is inappropriate because it shows only a few people in one particular camp in Kenya. The image is thus better suited to the humanitarian crisis section (where it originally was). The entire article is on the larger Eastern Africa crisis, not just on one particular area; and the FEWS map shows a broad overview of this. Per the bold initiative in WP:BRD, I have also added an image of the Al-Shabaab group's war flag to the security section where the group is discussed. Middayexpress ( talk) 19:27, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
There was a bit in the article from the Red Cross warning of a looming humanitarian crisis in the Turkana province of Kenya due to neglect on the part of humanitarian agencies. The fact that this (and probably other) pieces of information that were originally in the article got 'lost' in the recent shuffle illustrates the importance of actually discussing one's changes first (particularly when they are major), and trying to obtain consensus for them before implementing them. Middayexpress ( talk) 19:55, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
"The aid agency is now estimating that over three quarters of the population in the area is need of relief food with the international community trying to mop up funds to assist the Horn of Africa that is said to be facing the worst drought in 60 years."
Ease it back there folks. No need to get heated about this. I'll start now by saying that I don't know anything about the particular situation in Turkana. But based your discussions above, it sounds like the Turkana region could do with more aid, but that the people are spread out so it's difficult to deliver that aid. If I (hypothetically) was an aid agency with limited resources then delivering aid to a large bunch of needy people in one place - or trying to drop the same aid to the same number of people scattered over a large area would mean that the people at the camp would probably get the aid. It would not mean that the camp was to 'blame' for the hunger of the scattered people, just that aid agency could feed the people at the camp where it couldn't feed the scattered people. If my hypothetical aid agency had more resources it would no doubt deliver aid to both sets of people. I think the only time a camp could be to 'blame' for hunger elsewhere would be if they were 'taking resources' that had previously been allocated to the scattered people due to the numbers of arrivals at the camp, but if the camp didn't exist and those arrivals had not arrived - the scattered people might perhaps be fed and the ungathered refugees would just not get aid. I think it's probably a question of scant resources and centralizing supplies.
I don't think the aid agencies care whether kenya is horn of africa or not, someone starving is someone starving, resources for the famine in the 'horn of africa' are almost certainly sent to the camp and not to the scattered folk, but if the camp was a few miles inside the kenyan border I think it would still go there :) EdwardLane ( talk) 13:15, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Our section on Refugee crisis currently states (last sentence of first paragraph):
"There is an upsurge in sexual violence against women and girls in the refugee camps, putting them at high risk of HIV/AIDS."
with this reference . . .
UN report, Humanitarian Requirements for the Horn of Africa Drought, http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Full_report_216.pdf, page 10 “ . . . several hundred people crossing into Ethiopia and approximately 1,300 into Kenya daily. Overcrowding in Dadaab, the largest refugee settlement in the world, is severe and resulting in refugees not getting the assistance they need. There is reportedly an upsurge in sexual violence against women and girls, putting them at high risk of and exposure to HIV/AIDS. Some 60,000 people are currently settled on the outskirts of the main camps where access to services is minimal. Increasing tensions between the refugee population and local communities, particularly in Dadaab, threatens to exacerbate the situation by increasing insecurity and creating additional protection concerns. . . ”
CBC News (Canada), Famine refugees face increased violence, aid groups say, Lily Boisson, Jul 25, 2011.
“ . . . A UNHCR report says sexual and gender-based violence against women in Dadaab has quadrupled in the past six months. This year 358 cases were reported from January to June. Last year 75 cases were reported in the same time period.
“Alexandra Lopoukhine of CARE Canada says women are especially vulnerable during the journey to the camps, when they often travel with only their few belongings and their sick children. It is then that many of them are robbed or sexually attacked. . . ”
“ . . . Because land is scarce in the already overcrowded camps, new arrivals are forced to settle on the outskirts of the camp, leaving them vulnerable to attack.
“These women are particularly at risk when they leave their homes in the camp to search for firewood.
“ "There's a fear of going to the bush because they think they are going to encounter violence," Murray says. "Many women say that there are men in the bush and these men have guns and they're going to attack."
“The search for firewood, which is used for cooking, can take all day. . . ”
“Erin Patrick of the Women's Refugee Comission says the refugees are often competing with local residents for scarce resources. . . ”
According to Reuters, the Transitional Federal Government's troops and their AMISOM allies reportedly managed to capture all of Mogadishu from the Al-Shabaab militants. Witnesses reported Al-Shabaab vehicles abandoning their bases in the capital for the south-central city of Baidoa. The group's spokesman Sheikh Ali Mohamud Rage described the exodus as a tactical retreat, and vowed to continue the insurgency against the national government. Observers have suggested that the pullout may at least in part have been caused by internal ideological rifts in the rebel organization. [8] Middayexpress ( talk) 19:07, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
According to the news that I looked, the are some big changes in the article. Please leave a message if you think this isn't correct. -- Mohamed Aden Ighe ( talk) 17:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
What warning was there in the run-up to this? It seems that several sources are saying it was predicted for months, but I can't find concrete predictions anywhere before it hit the news - can anyone else? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.106.4 ( talk) 17:37, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Somalia famine: PM Ali sets up aid protection force, Mary Harper, BBC News, 13 August 2011 Last updated at 12:54 ET:
"Somalia's prime minister has announced the creation of a special force to protect convoys delivering aid to people affected by drought and famine.
"Abdiweli Mohamed Ali said the force would comprise 300 trained men, helped by AU peacekeepers who are currently providing security in Mogadishu. . .
" . . . Most of the famine-affected areas are still controlled by al-Shabab, which has often been reluctant to cooperate with international agencies.
"The UN said earlier this week that aid was only reaching 20% of the Somalis who need it."
Hello,
I get telephone reports from Moga that small groups of government soldiers have plundered drought refugees (IDP's) in several locations in and around Mogadishu.
I could find nothing about it on the main newsnets, except for something on http://www.shabelle.net/article.php?id=9722.
This is exactly what happenend in the early 1990's and many times since, in area's controlled by war lords: They 'tax' IDP's for being on 'their' territory and having received food aid. Or their subjects do.
I think for relief distribution in and around Moga, plundering soldiers are now a much more serious threat then Al-Shabaab. So I think they deserve being mentioned high up in the security paragraph. But I don't have good resources, and wouldn't know how to fit it in. Any suggestions?
P.S. Sorry for not reacting to questions from you guys, I still have to learn my way around Wikipedia and I don't always have internet. About my earlier contributions: Much of the things that you threw out for having no sources, came from my own conversations with WFP - top and Somali's around East-Africa. I will try to to find sources, although one problem is that with very few independent journalists and researchers on the ground, there is very little that comes out, other then what interested parties want to get out. (Many Somali journalists are good, but a handful were murdered for writing the 'wrong' things, so they are very careful in bringing news.)
As a result, misbehaving by government allied troops, while off the record quickly admitted by many in the aid organizations, gets enormously underreported. Also, many statements by Mogadishu government side, even if they are obviously gross misrepresentations of facts, get uncritical reproduction throughout world media. And Al-Shabaab is not good in getting their side of the story out, even less now they are falling apart in regions. I don't know how to get around that, will give it more thought. Pieter Felix Smit ( talk) 12:12, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, Pieter Smit, Amsterdam. Pieter Felix Smit ( talk) 12:12, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Problem solved, due to Human right watch report and statements. (I added them to main page security). To Middayexpress: See also [1] What I get from people in Mogadishu is that Al-Shabaab fighters in Mogadishu used much less drugs (Khat) and are generally better disciplined. The pillage of refugees, which was a constant given under government and war lord militia control after each food distribution, almost stopped under Al-Shabaab control. I've heard this claim many times, also from Somali's in Ethiopia and Kenya, also from Somali's who hate Al-Shabaab. However, with Al Shabaab now disintegrating into at least two sections, their relative discipline against the local poor might also erode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pieter Felix Smit ( talk • contribs) 08:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
The security section largely focuses on Al-Shabaab not letting aid in (also mentioning lots of interesting, but outdated and now partly irrelevant details). But the situation is changing rapidly: Shabaab is now split, with Sheikh Aways in favor of letting aid in. Aways his militia control large parts of the famine area, and because of the split, they will likely no longer allow in Shabaab fighters from Kismayo region. (They have the International fighters in their ranks, and they are much more hostile to the aid operation.) Effectively, large parts of central Somalia are opening up, for any aid agency who has the guts to phone up Sheikh Aways.
The remarks of Human Rights Watch cited by Reuters Alertnet [2] and the reporting in The Telegraph [3] make it clear that any aid operation has at least as much to fear from government controlled and government allied militia's, as from Al-Shabaab, especially seen the loose 'coalition' of warlord militia that operate outside government control. This coalition was held together by the common enemy Al-Shabaab, so with Shabaab falling apart, the coalition likely also will. (Speculation based on my own experience and contacts in Mogadishu, Somalia and the region) This might ask for a revision of the first paragraphs, balancing the mentioning of the several (potential) problem-makers, and mentioning the possible opening of Shabaab-Aways-controlled area. Anyone want to do it? Pieter Felix Smit ( talk) 09:07, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello Middayexpress, The VOA article you mention, reports on lootings that predate the looting that my sources, the Telegraph and Human Rights Watch mentioned. (Looting from several days AFTER Shabaab-Kismayo left Moga, i.e several days after august 6th.) Therefore I would think it is not relevant at that place, so maybe we can delete that addition?
It might be possible that IF people wear government soldier uniforms while looting, they indeed are government soldiers while looting. This seems to be confirmed inter alia by Somalia' s prime minister, see http://www.shabelle.net/article.php?id=9823. If older info is relevant , then there is a good UN-report from last year, seen by the New York Times, which states that government forces are as involved in looting aid as any other armed actors in Somalia. Reading the fine print, it seems the UN auditors thought that Shabaab was looting aid MUCH LESS then other armed actors. Taking a denial from the guy, responsible for the alledged looting soldiers as the definite source on looting-truth is a bit tricky, especially since we have seen many statements and claims by Somalia's top officials quickly changed or denied or proven false.
Also, we have a problem about which Shebaab we are quoting. Since Shebaab has effectively split up and returned to their respective 'homelands' (this explains the sudden withdrawal of Shabaab from Mogadishu on august 6th) it would maybe be helpful to refer to either Shabaab-Kismayo or Shabaab-River valley. The first Shebaab-clan is staunchly opposed to most foreign aid, the second Shebaab-clan (controlling much more terrain in famine stricken Juba and Shebeeele river valley) is not. Pieter Felix Smit ( talk) 22:00, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
I AM NOT A DOCTOR. I want to put that first and foremost. All the same, I do think we can include at least some information as well as refering people to good sources.
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, World Health Organization, 2005
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2005/9241593180.pdf
(page 3)
" . . . Oral Rehydration Salts (ORS) are dissolved in water to form ORS solution . . . "
(page 10)
" . . . By giving zinc as soon as diarrhoea starts . . . "
(page 10)
" . . . The infant usual diet should be continued during diarrhoea and increased afterwards. Food should never be withheld and the child's usual foods should not be diluted. Breastfeeding should always be continued. . . "
There is also the issue of the 'old' vs. 'new' recipe for ORS.
See above source, the chapter on “MANAGEMENT OF DIARRHOEA WITH SEVERE MALNUTRITION," pages 22-24 (26-28 in PDF file). http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2005/9241593180.pdf
This situation can be trickier to diagnosis, for example, between severe dehydration and merely some dehydration, and also between septic shock and severe dehydration.
And for this child or adult who is both dehydrated and has severe malnutrition, the treatment is somewhat different.
I included the following specific news article:
Cholera Outbreaks Spread Across Somalia, U.N. Says, New York Times, filed from Nairobi, Kenya, by JEFFREY GETTLEMAN, August 12, 2011.
And I also included some general information, and hopefully hit that sweet spot of giving enough information without giving too much. I can, as always, use the help and participation of other people. I thank Middayexpress for expressed interest and hope time allows for further participation. This is obviously a very important situation in the Horn of Africa. Cool Nerd ( talk) 20:38, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian ( talk) 18:43, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
2011 East Africa drought → 2011 Horn of Africa famine – The article was moved from "2011 Horn of Africa famine" to here ("2011 Somalia famine") unilaterally by User:PassaMethod. The title of this article has underwent a very extensive discussion in the talk page, and while there were disagreements about whether to call the event a famine or a food crisis, there is universal agreement that the topic should include the Horn of Africa and not only Somalia. That is what the content of the article reflects. User:PassaMethod's move is misleading, incorrect, and against the consensus of every other user. Jim Sukwutput 12:14, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
The article's title may need to be changed from 2011 Horn of Africa drought to 2011 Horn of Africa food crisis or 2011 Horn of Africa famine if its contents focus on the humanitarian effects of the drought rather than its meteorological causes. -- Arjuno ( talk 03:19, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
I nominated this article for the In The News section on the main page. Chime in here. Jim Sukwutput 07:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
I see no mention of Eritrea as being affected - I note incidentally that the map does seem to have eritrea shaded (which is probably correct) as I would be surprised if Eritrea were unaffected
Something to add to the article might be that the US government apparently asked Eritrea to reveal the info on tuesday according to this.
While this says PBS news report that Eritrea is affected.
I also wonder about other adjacent countries/autonomous regions Puntland and Somaliland are they suffering "famine" as defined by the UN (or not?). I think this the article could probably do with a better map (though that will probably be hard to sort out). EdwardLane ( talk) 16:46, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
There's a dubious claim in the Humanitarian situation section that is falsely attributed to unnamed reports by World Vision International. The claim goes "According to reports by World Vision International, families are agreeing to give their daughters as young as 13 in arranged marriages just to earn money from the dowry so that they can purchase food". It purports to be sourced to this news article, but the news article does not say this. It instead quotes a pedestrian claiming that this is what some people are doing: "Fatuma Ahmed sat at sunrise frying thin maize pancakes that will be the only food she and her seven children would eat that day. She told of how "in the dark because people don't want others to know", families are agreeing to give their daughters as young as 13 in arranged marriages just to earn money from the dowry."" What one pedestrian claims in passing is not World Vision International's writ and also clearly fails WP:REDFLAG. I have thus removed it. Further down in the International response section, there's another phrase, this time a direct quote from the UNHCR humanitarian coordinator for Somalia, that asserts that he and his organization at the moment ""do not have all the resources for food, clean water, shelter and health services to save the lives of hundreds of thousands of Somalis in desperate need"". This is mistakenly attributed to this article by CNN, when it's actually taken from this article from the Guardian. Some of the other material in the Wikipedia article also looks somewhat doubtful; so if independent editors who have not contributed significantly to the article could evaluate it, that would be great. Middayexpress ( talk) 22:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
Assuming current levels of response, famine is expected to spread across all regions of southern Somalia in the next 1-2 months.[1]
As of late July 2011, however, the famine appears to be restricted to the Bakool and Lower Shabelle regions of southern Somalia according to the U.N.. Despite this, Bowden warns that, given the low crop yields and outbreaks of infectious illnesses caused by the prolonged drought, famine could expand to also affect the remaining regions of southern Somalia within a period of two months.[18]
Given the low crop yields and outbreaks of infectious illnesses caused by the prolonged drought, and assuming current levels of response, famine is expected spread across all regions of southern Somalia within a period of two months.[1][18]
I took off your first sentence because 1. We just mentioned that UN declared a famine in the two regions in the previous paragraph; 2. The definition of this famine is by U.N. definitions and according to U.N. data only; their data can be up to two weeks late, which is not a reflection of what actually happens. Given this, it's possible to say "U.N. declares a famine in certain regions", but not "a famine exists in certain region only". Thoughts? Jim Sukwutput 23:44, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
The article seems to have been prematurely appended "famine". According to the UN humanitarian coordinator for Somalia, Mark Bowden, there's an actual famine going on in only two regions in the country, not the Horn of Africa as a whole. He warns, however, that it could spread within a few months to the other regions in southern Somalia if he and his organization don't get the relief supplies that they require for their operations. Middayexpress ( talk) 22:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
"When a significant majority of English-language reliable sources all refer to the topic or subject of an article by a given name, Wikipedia should follow the sources and use that name as our article title (subject to the other naming criteria). Sometimes that common name will include non-neutral words that Wikipedia normally avoids (Examples include Boston Massacre, Rape of Belgium, and Teapot Dome scandal). In such cases, the commonality of the name overrides our desire to avoid passing judgment (see below). This is acceptable because the non-neutrality and judgment is that of the sources, and not that of Wikipedia editors. True neutrality means we do not impose our opinions over that of the sources, even when our opinion is that the name used by the sources is judgmental. Further, even when a neutral title is possible, creating redirects to it using documented but non-neutral terms is sometimes acceptable; see WP:RNEUTRAL."
Just a note that some of the figures in the article are from last week and are probably out-dated, especially the figures for humanitarian assistance from different countries and NGOs. If anyone has seen newer numbers, please update. Thanks. Jim Sukwutput 01:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
The child in the photo under "Humanitarian situation" has two left feet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.245.254.46 ( talk) 13:09, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
I am still wondering what caused User:Jim Sukwutput to revert my last two edits to this article. I have searched through MOS:ABBR (which, as far as I can tell, is the relevant page here, not the main MOS page as this user provided in the reversion edit summary) but I have found nothing there that disputes my edits. Certainly, there's nothing in there about having half an article say "UN" while the other half says "U.N." And, besides, I don't see how this edit does anything but clarify a potentially confusing passage. Bobnorwal ( talk) 14:31, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
To head off at the pass any future revisions, I'll stake my (rather small) claim here.
Bobnorwal ( talk) 22:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
It's perfectly sensible to include links to humanitarian groups, but link to the main page about the issue. Linking to a special donations page which has a special url has caused problems in the past in which a 'look alike' site has substituted their own link to get the money and credit card details. That's why I changed the Unicef link. There's a 'Donate now' link on that page, but there's no question it's the official Unicef site because it starts with www.unicef.org 75.60.18.64 ( talk) 17:55, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
This article has been nominated to appear on the In the News section on the main page again. Right now there seems to be some disagreement about which particular development we should post or whether we should make this a sticky. Any opinion will be much appreciated. Jim Sukwutput 19:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
The Al-Shabaab group has issued a statement responding to some of the news reports alleging that it has banned food aid distribution. On July 5, 2011, the group's spokesman Sheikh Ali Dhere indicated that his organization had no issue with allowing both Muslim and non-Muslim individuals from helping the drought-impacted people as long as those groups harbored no ulterior motives in doing so. Dhere added that his organization believes that many aid agencies are exaggerating their relief requirements so as to satisfy their own selfish objectives. He also suggested that the actual nature of many of the relief operations are twofold: first, some of the aid workers are in effect attacking as "spies", while others, including the UN, he charged of harboring a tacit political agenda not in keeping with what they claim to be doing. In addition, Dhere alleged that aid agencies that are providing assistance in neighboring countries are attempting to siphon away the various Muslim peoples of Somalia in order to more easily indoctrinate them into Christianity. Al-Shabaab members have been reported to have intimidated, kidnapped and killed some aid workers, leading to a suspension of humanitarian operations and an exodus of relief agents [3].
That said, the part of the text above regarding Al-Shabaab's specific charge that the UN and other relief organizations have "a political agenda, doing nothing like what they were claiming" -- which, for some odd reason, was removed from this article -- has been re-added. Middayexpress ( talk) 23:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
I have partially restored the original layout that was modified during a series of major, undiscussed changes to the article. The image that was added to the infobox in the FEWS map's place is inappropriate because it shows only a few people in one particular camp in Kenya. The image is thus better suited to the humanitarian crisis section (where it originally was). The entire article is on the larger Eastern Africa crisis, not just on one particular area; and the FEWS map shows a broad overview of this. Per the bold initiative in WP:BRD, I have also added an image of the Al-Shabaab group's war flag to the security section where the group is discussed. Middayexpress ( talk) 19:27, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
There was a bit in the article from the Red Cross warning of a looming humanitarian crisis in the Turkana province of Kenya due to neglect on the part of humanitarian agencies. The fact that this (and probably other) pieces of information that were originally in the article got 'lost' in the recent shuffle illustrates the importance of actually discussing one's changes first (particularly when they are major), and trying to obtain consensus for them before implementing them. Middayexpress ( talk) 19:55, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
"The aid agency is now estimating that over three quarters of the population in the area is need of relief food with the international community trying to mop up funds to assist the Horn of Africa that is said to be facing the worst drought in 60 years."
Ease it back there folks. No need to get heated about this. I'll start now by saying that I don't know anything about the particular situation in Turkana. But based your discussions above, it sounds like the Turkana region could do with more aid, but that the people are spread out so it's difficult to deliver that aid. If I (hypothetically) was an aid agency with limited resources then delivering aid to a large bunch of needy people in one place - or trying to drop the same aid to the same number of people scattered over a large area would mean that the people at the camp would probably get the aid. It would not mean that the camp was to 'blame' for the hunger of the scattered people, just that aid agency could feed the people at the camp where it couldn't feed the scattered people. If my hypothetical aid agency had more resources it would no doubt deliver aid to both sets of people. I think the only time a camp could be to 'blame' for hunger elsewhere would be if they were 'taking resources' that had previously been allocated to the scattered people due to the numbers of arrivals at the camp, but if the camp didn't exist and those arrivals had not arrived - the scattered people might perhaps be fed and the ungathered refugees would just not get aid. I think it's probably a question of scant resources and centralizing supplies.
I don't think the aid agencies care whether kenya is horn of africa or not, someone starving is someone starving, resources for the famine in the 'horn of africa' are almost certainly sent to the camp and not to the scattered folk, but if the camp was a few miles inside the kenyan border I think it would still go there :) EdwardLane ( talk) 13:15, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
Our section on Refugee crisis currently states (last sentence of first paragraph):
"There is an upsurge in sexual violence against women and girls in the refugee camps, putting them at high risk of HIV/AIDS."
with this reference . . .
UN report, Humanitarian Requirements for the Horn of Africa Drought, http://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Full_report_216.pdf, page 10 “ . . . several hundred people crossing into Ethiopia and approximately 1,300 into Kenya daily. Overcrowding in Dadaab, the largest refugee settlement in the world, is severe and resulting in refugees not getting the assistance they need. There is reportedly an upsurge in sexual violence against women and girls, putting them at high risk of and exposure to HIV/AIDS. Some 60,000 people are currently settled on the outskirts of the main camps where access to services is minimal. Increasing tensions between the refugee population and local communities, particularly in Dadaab, threatens to exacerbate the situation by increasing insecurity and creating additional protection concerns. . . ”
CBC News (Canada), Famine refugees face increased violence, aid groups say, Lily Boisson, Jul 25, 2011.
“ . . . A UNHCR report says sexual and gender-based violence against women in Dadaab has quadrupled in the past six months. This year 358 cases were reported from January to June. Last year 75 cases were reported in the same time period.
“Alexandra Lopoukhine of CARE Canada says women are especially vulnerable during the journey to the camps, when they often travel with only their few belongings and their sick children. It is then that many of them are robbed or sexually attacked. . . ”
“ . . . Because land is scarce in the already overcrowded camps, new arrivals are forced to settle on the outskirts of the camp, leaving them vulnerable to attack.
“These women are particularly at risk when they leave their homes in the camp to search for firewood.
“ "There's a fear of going to the bush because they think they are going to encounter violence," Murray says. "Many women say that there are men in the bush and these men have guns and they're going to attack."
“The search for firewood, which is used for cooking, can take all day. . . ”
“Erin Patrick of the Women's Refugee Comission says the refugees are often competing with local residents for scarce resources. . . ”
According to Reuters, the Transitional Federal Government's troops and their AMISOM allies reportedly managed to capture all of Mogadishu from the Al-Shabaab militants. Witnesses reported Al-Shabaab vehicles abandoning their bases in the capital for the south-central city of Baidoa. The group's spokesman Sheikh Ali Mohamud Rage described the exodus as a tactical retreat, and vowed to continue the insurgency against the national government. Observers have suggested that the pullout may at least in part have been caused by internal ideological rifts in the rebel organization. [8] Middayexpress ( talk) 19:07, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
According to the news that I looked, the are some big changes in the article. Please leave a message if you think this isn't correct. -- Mohamed Aden Ighe ( talk) 17:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
What warning was there in the run-up to this? It seems that several sources are saying it was predicted for months, but I can't find concrete predictions anywhere before it hit the news - can anyone else? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.106.4 ( talk) 17:37, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
Somalia famine: PM Ali sets up aid protection force, Mary Harper, BBC News, 13 August 2011 Last updated at 12:54 ET:
"Somalia's prime minister has announced the creation of a special force to protect convoys delivering aid to people affected by drought and famine.
"Abdiweli Mohamed Ali said the force would comprise 300 trained men, helped by AU peacekeepers who are currently providing security in Mogadishu. . .
" . . . Most of the famine-affected areas are still controlled by al-Shabab, which has often been reluctant to cooperate with international agencies.
"The UN said earlier this week that aid was only reaching 20% of the Somalis who need it."
Hello,
I get telephone reports from Moga that small groups of government soldiers have plundered drought refugees (IDP's) in several locations in and around Mogadishu.
I could find nothing about it on the main newsnets, except for something on http://www.shabelle.net/article.php?id=9722.
This is exactly what happenend in the early 1990's and many times since, in area's controlled by war lords: They 'tax' IDP's for being on 'their' territory and having received food aid. Or their subjects do.
I think for relief distribution in and around Moga, plundering soldiers are now a much more serious threat then Al-Shabaab. So I think they deserve being mentioned high up in the security paragraph. But I don't have good resources, and wouldn't know how to fit it in. Any suggestions?
P.S. Sorry for not reacting to questions from you guys, I still have to learn my way around Wikipedia and I don't always have internet. About my earlier contributions: Much of the things that you threw out for having no sources, came from my own conversations with WFP - top and Somali's around East-Africa. I will try to to find sources, although one problem is that with very few independent journalists and researchers on the ground, there is very little that comes out, other then what interested parties want to get out. (Many Somali journalists are good, but a handful were murdered for writing the 'wrong' things, so they are very careful in bringing news.)
As a result, misbehaving by government allied troops, while off the record quickly admitted by many in the aid organizations, gets enormously underreported. Also, many statements by Mogadishu government side, even if they are obviously gross misrepresentations of facts, get uncritical reproduction throughout world media. And Al-Shabaab is not good in getting their side of the story out, even less now they are falling apart in regions. I don't know how to get around that, will give it more thought. Pieter Felix Smit ( talk) 12:12, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, Pieter Smit, Amsterdam. Pieter Felix Smit ( talk) 12:12, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Problem solved, due to Human right watch report and statements. (I added them to main page security). To Middayexpress: See also [1] What I get from people in Mogadishu is that Al-Shabaab fighters in Mogadishu used much less drugs (Khat) and are generally better disciplined. The pillage of refugees, which was a constant given under government and war lord militia control after each food distribution, almost stopped under Al-Shabaab control. I've heard this claim many times, also from Somali's in Ethiopia and Kenya, also from Somali's who hate Al-Shabaab. However, with Al Shabaab now disintegrating into at least two sections, their relative discipline against the local poor might also erode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pieter Felix Smit ( talk • contribs) 08:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
The security section largely focuses on Al-Shabaab not letting aid in (also mentioning lots of interesting, but outdated and now partly irrelevant details). But the situation is changing rapidly: Shabaab is now split, with Sheikh Aways in favor of letting aid in. Aways his militia control large parts of the famine area, and because of the split, they will likely no longer allow in Shabaab fighters from Kismayo region. (They have the International fighters in their ranks, and they are much more hostile to the aid operation.) Effectively, large parts of central Somalia are opening up, for any aid agency who has the guts to phone up Sheikh Aways.
The remarks of Human Rights Watch cited by Reuters Alertnet [2] and the reporting in The Telegraph [3] make it clear that any aid operation has at least as much to fear from government controlled and government allied militia's, as from Al-Shabaab, especially seen the loose 'coalition' of warlord militia that operate outside government control. This coalition was held together by the common enemy Al-Shabaab, so with Shabaab falling apart, the coalition likely also will. (Speculation based on my own experience and contacts in Mogadishu, Somalia and the region) This might ask for a revision of the first paragraphs, balancing the mentioning of the several (potential) problem-makers, and mentioning the possible opening of Shabaab-Aways-controlled area. Anyone want to do it? Pieter Felix Smit ( talk) 09:07, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
Hello Middayexpress, The VOA article you mention, reports on lootings that predate the looting that my sources, the Telegraph and Human Rights Watch mentioned. (Looting from several days AFTER Shabaab-Kismayo left Moga, i.e several days after august 6th.) Therefore I would think it is not relevant at that place, so maybe we can delete that addition?
It might be possible that IF people wear government soldier uniforms while looting, they indeed are government soldiers while looting. This seems to be confirmed inter alia by Somalia' s prime minister, see http://www.shabelle.net/article.php?id=9823. If older info is relevant , then there is a good UN-report from last year, seen by the New York Times, which states that government forces are as involved in looting aid as any other armed actors in Somalia. Reading the fine print, it seems the UN auditors thought that Shabaab was looting aid MUCH LESS then other armed actors. Taking a denial from the guy, responsible for the alledged looting soldiers as the definite source on looting-truth is a bit tricky, especially since we have seen many statements and claims by Somalia's top officials quickly changed or denied or proven false.
Also, we have a problem about which Shebaab we are quoting. Since Shebaab has effectively split up and returned to their respective 'homelands' (this explains the sudden withdrawal of Shabaab from Mogadishu on august 6th) it would maybe be helpful to refer to either Shabaab-Kismayo or Shabaab-River valley. The first Shebaab-clan is staunchly opposed to most foreign aid, the second Shebaab-clan (controlling much more terrain in famine stricken Juba and Shebeeele river valley) is not. Pieter Felix Smit ( talk) 22:00, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
I AM NOT A DOCTOR. I want to put that first and foremost. All the same, I do think we can include at least some information as well as refering people to good sources.
THE TREATMENT OF DIARRHOEA, A manual for physicians and other senior health workers, World Health Organization, 2005
http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2005/9241593180.pdf
(page 3)
" . . . Oral Rehydration Salts (ORS) are dissolved in water to form ORS solution . . . "
(page 10)
" . . . By giving zinc as soon as diarrhoea starts . . . "
(page 10)
" . . . The infant usual diet should be continued during diarrhoea and increased afterwards. Food should never be withheld and the child's usual foods should not be diluted. Breastfeeding should always be continued. . . "
There is also the issue of the 'old' vs. 'new' recipe for ORS.
See above source, the chapter on “MANAGEMENT OF DIARRHOEA WITH SEVERE MALNUTRITION," pages 22-24 (26-28 in PDF file). http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2005/9241593180.pdf
This situation can be trickier to diagnosis, for example, between severe dehydration and merely some dehydration, and also between septic shock and severe dehydration.
And for this child or adult who is both dehydrated and has severe malnutrition, the treatment is somewhat different.
I included the following specific news article:
Cholera Outbreaks Spread Across Somalia, U.N. Says, New York Times, filed from Nairobi, Kenya, by JEFFREY GETTLEMAN, August 12, 2011.
And I also included some general information, and hopefully hit that sweet spot of giving enough information without giving too much. I can, as always, use the help and participation of other people. I thank Middayexpress for expressed interest and hope time allows for further participation. This is obviously a very important situation in the Horn of Africa. Cool Nerd ( talk) 20:38, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian ( talk) 18:43, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
2011 East Africa drought → 2011 Horn of Africa famine – The article was moved from "2011 Horn of Africa famine" to here ("2011 Somalia famine") unilaterally by User:PassaMethod. The title of this article has underwent a very extensive discussion in the talk page, and while there were disagreements about whether to call the event a famine or a food crisis, there is universal agreement that the topic should include the Horn of Africa and not only Somalia. That is what the content of the article reflects. User:PassaMethod's move is misleading, incorrect, and against the consensus of every other user. Jim Sukwutput 12:14, 20 August 2011 (UTC)