![]() | 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 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 |
Actually, the correct date for Gaddafi being overthrown is 23 August 2011. Most media sources says about former Libyan leader killed on 20 October 2011, meaning Gaddafi was already overthrown when the rebels took over the Tripoli compound before he was killed in Sirte. AFP, AP and Reuters many more confirm this.
On an unrelated discussion, it is necessary to say "Replacement of the green Libyan flag with the pre-Gaddafi tricolour." this statement? Because I find it that Libya identity has changed more than just changing the flag. Her national anthem, coat of arms, government and other old Libyan identity as well too changed. 60.49.61.211 ( talk) 08:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
The role played by the social networks has been exagerated, especially in Tunisia. (cf. Jean-Pierre Filiu) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.151.180.227 ( talk) 21:08, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
The Arab Spring (Arabic: الربيع العربي; also known as the Arabic Rebellions or the Arab Revolutions) ... major protests in Israel, Algeria, Iraq, ...
I knew it! Sooner or later, the Arabs say: Welcome Israel!
But .... Israel is an Arab country? Ayeff ( talk) 11:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
Hahaha! If I'm a very bias towards the Jews I believe they say Israel is their homeland for Jews. This is a very general fact that Israel is NOT AN Arab country. It was majority Jewish. This goes same thing to Iran and Afghanistan whereby because they are Muslims or placed under Middle East, it does not mean is an Arab country. 60.49.62.246 ( talk) 10:34, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Israel is under Impact of the Arab Spring 60.49.62.246 ( talk) 03:42, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
It's not Israel that's included, it's its border. The Palestinian protests for independence. EkoGraf ( talk) 03:16, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I think we should point out the fact the lebanese casualities came from clashes between various segment of the population and were not governement related Philoleb ( talk) 19:00, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
After initially trying to copyedit it into grammatical English, I've now completely removed a sentence referring to the Arab Spring as a form of the strategy of tension. This is massively POV, with the suggestion that it is some kind of Western plot, and completely unsupported by the cite given after the sentence below. If people are going to add stuff like this, it needs be cited as an opinion, fully attributed to who is saying it, and to come with cite to reliable sources that confirm this. -- The Anome ( talk) 00:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I notice that the massively POV-pushing "strategy of tension" stuff has been re-added by User:188.29.93.221, which seems to be a one-off use of the IP just for this purpose, by someone who is already familiar with Wikipedia's editing tools. However, since my previous removal of it was less that 24 hours ago, the 1RR rule applying to this article prevents me from removing it again. -- The Anome ( talk) 23:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Interesting. Taking a look at the history of the "strategy of tension" article, there seems to be one particular editor that likes to edit both (and only) this article and the strategy of tension article, from a variety of IP addresses all in the same range. I haven't yet been able to dig out all the occasions when this phrase has been added to this article, but I'm beginning to suspect this may be one single editor at work. -- The Anome ( talk) 02:14, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Maybe we should keep the Strategy of tension stuff as an opinion, this source clearly mentions it as a technique used in the Arab spring. P.S: I've requested semi-protection for the page. -- Tachfin ( talk) 22:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Editors are welcome to discuss it here. Greyshark09 ( talk) 22:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Hey, guys. I just heard something about the Sudanese opposition is trying to form a coalition to topple Omar al-Bashir. On the other hand, protesters just stormed Kuwait parliament. Somebody should keep an eye for these infamous Arab revolt countries. Thank you. 60.49.57.195 ( talk) 14:38, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
After a quick glance at the refs I see some blogs used in citations (e.g. Global voices), don't know how much there is of them so I'm gonna be removing those and other self-published material per WP:BLOGS. (P.S: This does not apply to blogs of respectable media e.g. Guardian, Aljazeera etc)-- Tachfin ( talk) 18:14, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello, people! Who are the vandal's news that hasn't updated such that the Libyan flag has already been changed? Why is the flag reverted to the old Libyan Arab Jamahiriya flag? Change that flag back now! The UN membership already confirms the Kingdom of Libya flag as the legitimate flag already! Do not use the green flag as the current one. Thank you.
60.48.195.249 ( talk) 04:54, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Actually I was looking at the Summary of protests by country country section. My thoughts were that if this is all about country, then why is both Golan Heights and the Western Sahara are considered countries? Golan Heights (Israeli border whatever) is actually a territory, not countries. The same as the Western Sahara. 60.48.195.249 ( talk) 05:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Makes sense. I compare it the same way as World War II belligerent flags as well as the Six-Days War. Thanks for reminding that. 118.100.70.240 ( talk) 11:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
On the map, I think it's appropriate to have reasons for why a color for a type of situation is chosen. It appears that blue symbolizes freedom. The countries with the darker blue were able to gain to more freedom and change. Red/Orange on the other hand should symbolize blood. The more red a country, the more violence is occurring in that nation.
Using that logic, then Yemen, Syria, and Bahrain should have a reddish color on the map, because those countries are currently having the relatively high rates of sustained violence.-- Futuretrillionaire ( talk) 02:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)Futuretrillionaire
Any changes needed to the map? The bigger question is is this a summary map (as it is now) or ongoing events map (most countries quiet, with current violence in Syria, Yemen and Egypt and minor protests in Jordan, Kuwait? Greyshark09 ( talk) 12:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
No, I disagree of what you mention about revisit the color scheme. Let me ask you a question, so if the Tunisian Prime Minister Ghannouchi resigns, will you do the same thing? I guess not. The same when Saif al-Islam were captured in Libya. A dictator overthrown is consider a final one. Do not revise it again. The Government Overthrown is the last one. Arab Spring is either all about total change or just demand for governmental changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.100.70.11 ( talk) 08:31, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
PS: Some people have refer to The Economist Arab Spring map, but here in this CNN International, its also a good map showing the coverage in the Arab World:
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2011/arab.unrest/
118.100.70.11 (
talk)
08:45, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Saleh signed the deal agreeing to transfer of powers today, so does that mean Yemen qualifies for a "revolution"? If so, then the article needs to be renamed and the map given the appropriate colours.-- ERAGON ( talk) 17:22, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Kudzu is right. Why is Yemen already black? Because he signs the power transfer deal does not mean its the end of his 33 year rule. He stills has 30 days left to step down.
60.49.60.182 ( talk) 04:44, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
The map changed back to Uprising, but why the Summary of Protests by Country still black? I saw many of the media sources says that "Saleh agrees to step down", which he actually did not step down at all. Who knows at the last minute Saleh will still back away once again? We need to hear his official annoucement (or at least his Vice-President or other important figures) of his hereby resignation. So please do not place it as "Government Overthrown". 118.100.70.11 ( talk) 08:07, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Bahrain should be "Sustained civil disorder and governmental changes" (like in the summary) or "Protests and governmental changes" (like in the map)? At least, the CNN considers Bahrain a situation similar to Yemen and Syria.-- 81.84.110.142 ( talk) 03:37, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Guys from Wikipedia I have a Question: So Saleh sign the deal which means officially he will transfer all his powers to his Vicepresident so he can work to create a Transitional goverment with the opposition, that will be like in December 23.So when that date comes, we can talk about a Revolution??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.29.154.113 ( talk) 17:44, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
The Yemen Post publisher and editor-in-chief Hakim Almasmari once quoted "Tactics are now being gathered by President Saleh to ensure that the power transfer signing only results in more ink on useless paper." To be honest, the GCC deal doesn't really deals anything. Even if Saleh signs it, Saleh still can break his promise by retaining his power. This is not bias but people in the past has usually done that. I'm quite doubful that after these 30 days he will be automatically step down. So even with that, we cannot verify a revolution (or Government Overthrown), unless the Yemeni ruling leaders announce his resignation just like Tunisia's Ben Ali (Prime Minister announces Ben Ali's flees to Saudi Arabia) and Egypt's Mubarak (His vice-president announces Mubarak resignation). Until then, Uprising is still the most common to be used for Yemen. 60.48.196.16 ( talk) 03:27, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
How/where to add it? I've seen several op/eds (e.g. this) about how 1.) the Arab Spring has opened the door for Islamists in formerly secular Arab strongman states and 2.) the West needs to accept this as the will of the people. The latter point is a bit POV, but the former is certainly empirical and should be assessed in this article briefly (per summary style) and in more detail elsewhere. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:52, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
I just want to make it clear about this. I'm wrong about changing the flag, especially when it comes to Libya. The Summary of Protests by Country country section depicts about the historic country which starts the uprising, not the current one. The thing about flag displayed on Libya is different from this article bcuz this one belongs to an article which talks about history while that Libya talks about the current one (although separate with its history section). Therefore it's true that the war started with the old Libyan flag, not the new one. So don't change the Libyan flag.
In the future, any country's uprising which results in the new flag, like if Syria revolution will win soon, given that the opposition uses their pre-1963 flag, do not attempt to change it in this article. Leave it be the same. If you do not believe what I said then I guess we should hook up all the war articles, like World War I and World War II. Those articles, how did they end up with those old flags?
60.49.56.180 ( talk) 03:18, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I need help from you to update this template. At this point in time, it isn't added into any articles. One of the concerns is that this timeline might get overloaded with text. If that's the case, key events are sufficient. Thanks in advance! Hytar ( talk) 02:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Over the weekend there was an Islamic inspired riots all over northern Iraqi province of Dohuk. There is already a wikipedia page on it, and I'm wondering if it should also be mentioned here as it is a recent islamic inspired movement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.112.63.195 ( talk) 07:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
(noted here since Day of Rage is not monitored.) Any objection to removing the redirect and instead making a reference link to Arab Spring from the Day of Rage page? Rationale: Other movements have sprung from that event that don't have a Middle East focus. -- DeknMike ( talk) 15:41, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
WE are in the context of the arab spring, it is thus more reasonable to refer to the the palestine/ israel region as occupid palestine. Philoleb ( talk) 05:54, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Actually putting the Israeli flag for stuff that happened in the Golan heights seems POV. I previously thought that Israel's entry was about the protests that occurred in Tel Aviv, but since it's about the Golan heights (which is recognized as an occupied territory by the U.N or if you hate the term "Occupy", is at least disputed) there should be no flag there. Or it should be included in Syria's entry since the protests happened from the Syrian side to which the Israeli army responded with fire. Nothing inside Israel proper happened a part from the Tel Aviv demonstrations last summer, which it seems, are not considered part of the Arab spring. Tachfin ( talk) 21:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm new to wikipedia, sorry i screwed up the table Philoleb ( talk) 22:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I removed the Golan Height and the Western Sahara from the Summary of Protests by Country section because they were not countries. They are territories. 60.49.56.153 ( talk) 02:38, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I disagree of what you said. If so, then why wasn't the Palestinian territories are also part of what you said? It's also a dispute territory between Israelis and the Palestinians, although currently controlled by Israel. And wrong, the information is illegitimate to put Western Sahara and Golan Heights (Israeli border area whatever you like to call) as a country since there are disputes between two countries. If there's no fix ownership then I have to remove it. Besides, if you wanna check Israeli border, one can check the Israeli border through this place and also the Western Sahara in this place too Arab_Spring#Others. 60.49.56.180 ( talk) 02:00, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Their are various sources including BBC and CNN claiming that Syria maybe inching closer to civil war. Maybe we should change the syrai to red for civil war.
Maybe we should define civil war as any country with a rebel army and government fighting the mainstream army and government.
What about a new map with a more fluid color...
Has anyone thought about posting death rates in the maps.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15769804
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15149133
http://www.newsfeedcentre.co.uk/sky/world-news/un-syria-in-civil-war-as-deaths-exceed-4000/
http://news.yahoo.com/un-syria-state-civil-war-163757327.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/01/us-syria-un-rights-idUSTRE7B01M720111201
Here are some base images that are free to use:
Danalm000 ( talk) 02:49, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
I agree with defining Syria as a country in civil war, however there is really no need to list death rates of any sort.
Scruce ( talk) 20:16, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
I have no very good paint skills and have never done formating in my occasional edits or i'd do it myself but i agree syria is in civil war... or is extremely close... in the last 2 weeks there have been multiple attacks on loyalist forces by the FSA, many casualties.
96.50.10.234 (
talk)
08:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Homs Syria Protests 2011 - 03.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 08:19, 10 December 2011 (UTC) |
I don't think Syria should be changed to civil war until the FSA holds a large amount of territory, but I think it should be treated like Libya was before it was called a civil war. It was called an "armed uprising", which I think is quite a fair way to describe the situation in Syria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.62.65 ( talk) 23:31, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Syria should be changed to a civil war. The reason is that ANY armed uprising is a civil war Ericl ( talk) 14:31, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
A lot of the "current state of protests" sections in the table claim that the protests have been subdued. However, this implies that the government arrested/killed or something along those lines and ended the protests, usually by force. Ended would mean the protests simply died down. The page seems to claim that certain protests were subdued when really the protests just ended. This should be fixed. I'm not an expert on which nations actually did have their protests subdued, so someone else should do it. I also fixed Tunisia, which claimed subdued instead of ended, a few weeks ago as an IP. Dayshade ( talk) 01:44, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
There are several things that need to be updated:
1. The sentence regarding about Ali Abdullah Saleh in the third paragraph of Overview needs to be changed.
2. The map color of Bahrain should change to dark blue.
3. The sentence "As of November 2011" In the same Overview section should change to December.
60.49.63.145 ( talk) 13:38, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
I can't because I'm not an autoconfirm user. So I request somebody with that user to do it. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 05:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
why is mohammed bouazizi not mentioned
75.68.82.58 (
talk)
02:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Sudan has recently just suffer another small wave of protests because of the dam proposal by the government to build it. Now some are asking for the overthrow of Bashir. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 17:10, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Good idea. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 05:31, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Sudanese activist arrested days after heckling ruling party official.
http://www.sudantribune.com/Sudanese-activist-arrested-days,41152
60.49.63.145 ( talk) 09:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello. Why is the Parties to the civil conflict and Lead figures are placed in the Arab Spring box? This is not a united Arab conflict, rather this is a separate Arab country conflicts. You can't put something like " Riad al-Asaad are allies of Sadiq al-Ahmar" just because they were both opposition leaders. Where is the evidence that Sadiq or Riad are helping each other sides? Likewise who says the King Hamad is the good friend of Muammar Gaddafi and Bashar al-Assad? He blasted both of them and declare as their enemies. Try not to do prejudice where all leaders will unite together and all opposition leaders too. In reality, there are leaders hates another leaders. If you wish to do so then do it at the separate articles but not on this general article. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 05:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
The text of the Bahrain section does not concur with the sources used to justify it. At the end of the first paragraph of the Bahrain section states: "On 14 March, at the request of the Crown Prince, GCC Saudi Arabian troops entered the country,[231] and opened fire on the protesters, several of whom were killed.[232][233]" In the next paragraph, it states: "On 16 March 2011, the protesters' camp in the Pearl Roundabout was evacuated, bulldozed, and set on fire by the Bahraini Defense Force, riot police, and the Peninsula Shield Force, the military arm of the Gulf Cooperation Council, which intervened reportedly at King Hamad's behest.[239]" The articles cited do not support either sentence. They make no claims that Saudi troops were definitely part of the group that opened fire on protestors nor that they were involved in bulldozing the Pearl Monument. Additionally, none of the articles support the (probably true, but still unsourced) claim that the Crown Prince of Bahrain requested the Saudi troops. Finally, there is no evidence in these citations that supports the statement that King Hamad requested either the Saudi intervention in general (though that claim makes sense) nor their participation in razing the protestors' camps. If no one objects, I will change the first sentence to read:
"On 14 March, presumably at the request of the Bahraini government, over 1,000 Saudi Arabian troops entered the country. Operating under the aegis of the Gulf Cooperation Council's Peninsula Shield Force (PSF) the Saudi troops moved to protect Bahraini government facilities [1]. There is no evidence that the Saudi troops fired on protestors [2], although there were rumors of a PSF operation against the protestors [3]. The United Arab Emirates sent 500 police officers to assist Bahraini efforts. [4]."
I will change the second to read: "On 16 March, the Bahraini Defense Force evacuated, bulldozed, and set fire to the protestors' camp at the Pearl Roundabout, killing at least three. [5] [6]"
If anyone can provide sources that support any of the original claims, I'll gladly support leaving them intact.
References
Abu Casey ( talk) 00:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Why are the colors for the Arab countries on the map all so very strange and unorthodox? Shouldn't primary and some secondary colors be used? (e.g. this cartogram- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EU_net_budget_2007-2013_per_capita_cartogram.png) That'd make the map a bit clearer and less eye-weary, as well as conform to normal map standards. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no cartographer. As a side note- Mauritania is the only Arab country without its own protest page. Should one be made? Or is nothing of relative importance happening there? Thanks— Mike44456 ( talk) 01:27, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello to all Wikipedians and anonymous users. I want to make it clear about the Yemeni upcoming events. There was some preparation of whether Saleh is leaving Yemen so that they will have smooth transition period until the February 2012 presidential elections. In case if anybody thinks about changing it to revolution, I would like to say I reject that. Just because Saleh leaves Yemen it doesn't mean he was overthrown. Like what I have said earlier, somebody from the top ruling officials, be it the Vice-President or Saleh himself, must announce his resignation and it then confirmed by the officials and reliable medias. If that's the case, then we will stick back to square one, where the expecting overthrown date should be 21 February 2012, consider if Saleh plays by the rule stepping down (unless he wants to get out from the deal for the 4th time again). Thank you and have a nice day of editing. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 15:18, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I reverted the page to the last version by User:60.49.63.145, since I know that your edits almost always prove to be constructive, and it struck me as unfair that neither of the editors who reverted you were willing to discuss the issue. (I'm really not happy about having the 1RR applied to this page, the article was only really about the AI conflict because a certain two users made it so, and they haven't reared their heads in ages.)
However I'm not certain I understand your reasoning.
Could you explain further? Thanks, -- Quintucket ( talk) 19:28, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Actually it was my fault for not putting reasons, to be honest. What I meant is that when I try to compare the summaries of that Yemeni uprising with many other websites, I found out that when most of them write in the paragraph form, they just quote it from the January 27 protests (beginning of the protests), and then followed by the Feb 3 "Day of Rage", then followed by the May conflict escalation during the pre-assassination (June 3 attack) time. Since then, not much of special events happen except those daily protests. I mean, necessary to mention all this? Thats why I only remove this sentence:
Since this is not the Yemeni uprising article itself, but rather a summary, would you really need to mention about a person killed by hand grenade, or gunfire, or protesters set fire to a building? These events aren't so special so its not required to put it. Some of these happens in other Arab countries like Egypt, E.G. protesters set fire on the NDP HQ, but it was not stated here. Regardless, the rest of them are all fine.
But don't worry. If you all disagree of what I said, you are welcome to revert it. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 07:55, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Seems like many people tend to focus more on popular uprisings and revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain, this is my discovery of those infamous Arab countries which suffer smaller protests. Any edits are welcome, if wish to.
Algeria:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ic2rj6WFjN-Y4BuxjoEoECmPaBRg?docId=CNG.4e49b326c0b56a603281add8e86b2b2d.631
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/12/us-algeria-housing-protests-idUSTRE80B12A20120112
Jordan:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/12/us-algeria-housing-protests-idUSTRE80B12A20120112
60.49.63.145 (
talk)
14:56, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Damn it! I accidentally paste the wrong link about Jordan. Two self-immolation deaths were reported. http://channel6newsonline.com/2012/01/clashes-erupt-during-pro-reform-protest-in-jordan/
No, I didn't do that. I tend to concentrate more on Yemen and Bahrain. That's why I said everybody are welcome to edit it. But I move that some of the countries like Morocco, Jordan, should not use the word Subdued or Ended since there are still major demonstration going on once a week or months, though not necessary every day. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 08:03, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
I have update many parts of the 2011 Yemeni uprising, but still many needs to be changed. I was hoping that some of the users could join me contribute the editing of Yemeni uprising as many of them are still focusing on the 2011 Syrian uprising and the 2011 Bahraini uprising. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 04:16, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
i've updated several Saudi Arabian parts of this article. This is more less a summary (lead of 2011–2012 Saudi Arabian protests) of summaries (the leads of the 3 individual timelines). My guess is that editors will be tempted to edit this summary directly rather than first adding content to the timeline or other specific articles - or the overall KSA article, and then looking at the thing as a whole to see if the individual events are important enough to require updates in summaries and summary of summaries. People who keep an eye on this article are welcome to shift the edits (with attribution: you should put "from [[Arab Spring]]" in the edit summary for copyright traceability) to the main body of individual KSA-protest-related articles, so that the leads don't get filled with long details about individual incidents (except for the most notable).
Given that there now seems to be a sustained cycle of protests/police shoot dead protestor/funeral/protests/police shoot dead protestor, i suspect that updates will be required quite often on the more specific articles. I don't see any point updating the Arab Spring article every time, though. Boud ( talk) 00:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
In this edit, a template was removed with the edit comment: "Removing template because template size is exceeded". i think this means the problem is having too many templates included in a single article, when all the sub-sub and sub-sub-sub etc. inclusions are carried out. Is this right?
In any case, the "dot" template usage in related-topic templates can be replaced by the listclass=hlist structure. This reduces the number of templates needed by a huge amount, and avoids having to cut/paste or otherwise generate non-ascii characters! i've updated the KSA, Bahrain, and Syria Arab Spring templates this way. The negative side of this change is that the default dots are probably a tiny bit smaller (they were already smaller than the dots in the Egyptian and Libyan templates, i think), but IMHO that's a small price to pay. The dots are really there just for spacing.
My changes probably reduced the number of included templates (dot templates) in Arab Spring by at least 100 (though i haven't counted exactly), without loss of any semantic or syntactic structure, AFAIK. Apologies if something got changed, though i tried to check carefully.
TODO: i'll let someone else do this for the other templates - the rendered change (change visible in a browser window) would be stronger for the Egyptian and Libyan cases, because they have big fat dots (at the moment, anyway).
Boud ( talk) 23:28, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
The country has witnessed its largest political protests ever, there's been violence between demonstrators and security forces, and now the government has resigned: [1] I think it's time to give the 2011 Kuwaiti protests their own page. - Kudzu1 ( talk) 17:24, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
In the death toll table it is mentioned that the count is nil. But I clearly remember there was couple of death cases in early demonstrations of the 'Bedoun' (which mean 'without' as expression of being stateless). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhd196 ( talk • contribs) 18:26, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
This spring is killing hundreds of christians, who became the most persecuted religious group in the world, and the article does not even cite it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.250.57.64 ( talk) 17:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
The anonymous users has "complaint" about we didn't put up the statement regarding persecution of Christians. But before we doing this so, has anyone wants to put up where a Tunisian Jew are allowed to run in elections and no one cares? 60.49.62.66 ( talk) 03:17, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
I just want to discuss about this topic. There are several anonymous users tries to put the end date of the Tunisian Revolution (which later I revert it back to Ongoing). Given that I saw the end date of the Libyan civil war is 23 October 2011, when is the exact end date for the Tunisia and Egypt? How about possible if put 14 January for Tunisia and 11 February for Egypt? 60.49.62.66 ( talk) 03:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
How about saying the day Ben Ali and Mubarak were overthrown are their end date, then making the rest of the incident as post-revolution? I saw one at CNN and the others in The Economist. 60.49.62.66 ( talk) 07:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Little known events taking place in the Maldives. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2012/02/20122765334806442.html are they related to the Arab Spring?-- Reader1987 ( talk) 09:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Maldives is not an Arab state despite its majority being Muslim. Its national language is Dhivehi, a language that is influenced by Indian language. 60.49.60.158 ( talk) 03:32, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
One of the Arab Spring shot just won the World Press Photo award. Should we mention this? 60.49.60.158 ( talk) 05:48, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Can somebody provide a scholarly citation for calling this "the Arab Awakening"? I have been studying the Middle East for years, and the Arab Spring since its beginning, and I have yet to actually come across somebody seriously coining the events as "Arab Awakening." The Arab Awakening usually refers to this, an Arabist movement that began in the 19th century. I won't remove the label and simply ask for discussion for now, but I will edit the Arab Awakening page from redirect to a disambiguation page. -- Crushti ( talk) 21:44, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
As of January 2012, the link Timeline of the Arab Spring is a red link, but on the search page for it [2], it can be seen that apparently every involved country has its own article on the subject. I think there is motivation for having an overall timeline, potentially including Template:Arab Spring using EasyTimeline. Mikael Häggström ( talk) 15:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Sudan:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/17/us-sudan-arrests-idUSTRE81G1JM20120217
Jordan: (LOL! The demands for ouster of the third King-appointed Prime Minister)
http://presstv.com/detail/227280.html
60.49.60.158 ( talk) 14:24, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
This is the best internet article I have seen on the topic. PPdd ( talk) 02:44, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
It appears that Saleh is mentioned to still be in power while he had signed the GCC initiative and started the transfer of power. Please update the article. I find that the Yemen section is up-to-date but the Overview is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wsaqaf ( talk • contribs) 11:59, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Please view this before making such hasty and pre-mature statements:
Talk:Arab_Spring#Yemeni Uprising or Revolution?.
Saleh never steps down. What really happens on November 23 is that Saleh just signed the deal, and agrees to step down only, that means he's not really stepping down yet. Besides, if you check most of the reliable sources and news media they will keep mentioning "...outgoing President Ali Abdullah Saleh..." which is another evidence that he hasn't step down yet. About the power transfer thing, you have already mentioned "started the transfer of power", so he may have transferred 10% of his power, but still there are 90% of the cabinet which he keep to himself. How's that suppose to mean he has step down already? What if he started to break his promise again? Please read this: Talk:Arab_Spring#About Yemen
60.49.63.145 ( talk) 05:29, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
I move that Yemen be changed to light blue on the map (Governmental changes) since Saleh has officially stepped down and the vice president is now in power. This should not be considered a revolution. User: Heresbubba53190
I absolutely disagree with Heresbubba53190's statement. Ben Ali left his prime minister in charge, Mubarak left the armed forces in charge. We still call those revolutions. The 1905 revolution in Russia left the Tsar still in power and we still call the Hungarian Revolution a revolution. Why then, is Yemen not a revolution? User: Dweedman —Preceding undated comment added 23:18, 23 December 2011 (UTC).
For HeadlessMaster, it really doesn't matter if Hadi has ruled Yemen as a VP for 14 to 99 years (just exaggerating saying) but the policy of the Yemeni protesters is to bring down the regime of Ali Abdullah Saleh, which means starting his ouster. If Saleh steps down, then it's consider a government overthrown. Likewise when it comes to Tunisia, when Ben Ali steps down, then although the Prime Minister Ghannouchi who has ruled Tunisia since 1999 has take over, we still call it a Government Overthrown. Saying Hadi takes over Yemen is not consider a Government Overthrown is actually consider a POV (point-of-view). Wikipedia is based on reliable media and sources only.
For Heresbubba53190 and Dweedman, yes the Yemenis are calling it a revolution. They are already asking the overthrow of the regime. Even until now the protesters keep claiming that they want to "continue their revolution", so its irrevelant to call it Governmental Changes. Besides, isn't Yemen has already implementing governmental changes long time ago? That's the reason why we labelled as "Sustained civil disorder and governmental changes".
But nobody has make any official statements such that Saleh has step down, so we cannot call it Government Overthrown for now. We cannot assume that because the GCC deal has expired in December 23 then we can say "Saleh has steps down already". Like I said earlier in this topic. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 03:58, 24 December 2011 (UTC)#
Saleh is gone, as it says in this article, [3] "Since Saleh handed over the reins to his deputy under the Gulf peace accord, a new government headed by an opposition leader has been formed. A presidential election is scheduled for February." Goltak ( talk) 20:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Can't wait for Feburary. Goltak ( talk) 18:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Okay. If you say so. Sorry for that. Well you could at least tell us that you aren't mean literally about "can't wait for February". After all, we don't know if you simply meant it directly or indirectly.
Its true. While you have that feeling, I guess me too. Because through my analysis the international media does not cover the Yemeni uprising more than the Syrian uprising (which I believe there was an alleged political bias among these medias) so I tend to focus more on Yemen. Tho so I don't have much time to really pay attention to Wikipedia as I have other things to do. Like you, I also want the fall of Ali Abdullah Saleh, and knowing by timeline and analyze you can notice Saleh has better tactics and tricks to stay in power than the defiant late Libyan leader Gaddafi. I may cross the line, so again, sorry for that. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 15:47, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
No harm done. When can we update the map of political change, I've noticed that it's now outdated, considering Saleh has stepped down and all. Goltak ( talk) 20:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
No. The election is on Tuesday, and there are at least 60% turnouts. But the election doesn't signal the end of Ali Abdullah Saleh. I have already gave a link about the Yemen post article, stating that the inauguration of Hadi will be held on next Monday. The inauguration of Hadi only signals the end of Ali Abdullah Saleh. So until then, Saleh still remains as the President of Republic of Yemen, and Hadi was the Acting President of Yemen. No government overthrown yet. 60.49.60.158 ( talk) 04:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
The Yemeni Vice President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi recently won an election to replace Ali Abdullah Saleh as President, should we change it to "Revolution"? 48Lugur ( talk) 02:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
It already won, but there was no inauguration of Hadi as The President of Yemen Republic yet. His inauguration is on the "next week". So Saleh wasn't overthrown yet until Hadi was sweared in.
http://yemenpost.net/Detail123456789.aspx?ID=3&SubID=4778&MainCat=3
60.49.60.158 (
talk)
03:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
News Update: Hadi supposedly is to sworn in next monday, but now he was expected to be sworn in to power by today Saturday morning.
http://yemenpost.net/Detail123456789.aspx?ID=3&SubID=4786&MainCat=3
60.49.60.158 (
talk)
03:25, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Hadi has finally sweared in as the president of Yemen. This marks the overthrown of Ali Abdullah Saleh already. Anybody can now openly edit his post-revolt in Yemen. 60.49.60.158 ( talk) 10:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
artillery attacks on a city is far off of civil disorder. -- Reader1987 ( talk) 13:40, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I know when I was following the Yemeni article, there are a lot of shelling between the Hashid tribes and the Republican Guards. Yet, it was still labelled as uprising. So, it maybe a far off of civil disorder in Syria, but it was still called Uprising. 60.49.60.158 ( talk) 05:24, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
i think that it is time to syria's status to a higher status than Sustained civil disorder Alhanuty ( talk) 02:37, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
The article is way too long — over twice the size of the suggested max. If someone would like to address that (with spin-off articles and sprucing), that would be great. That would make it easier for readers to load and read. The article is already unwieldy and out-of-guidelines large. As an ongoing event, we can anticipate that it will only get longer.
The article is now over 200,000 bytes, making it one of the 300 longest articles at the Project. WP:SIZERULE states: "Some useful rules of thumb ... What to do ... > 100 KB ... Almost certainly should be divided".-- Epeefleche ( talk) 21:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
I totally agree. This article is longer than those on the Revolutions of 1848 and the Napoleonic Wars. This is a problem with Wikipedia: current events are weighed too heavily in importance. This article should be 1/10th the size — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.177.224 ( talk) 02:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
I have a number of concerns about the use of "Arab Spring". Whilst I don't wish to cause any dissent it does seem that this phrase does resonate with and imply a form of pan-arabism. Pan-Arabism has been criticised as being racist, inciting prejudice against and downplaying the role of non-Arab peoples, such as the Berbers, Turks, Jews, Persians, Maronites and many others.
What is forthcoming from those countries that have changed their regimes (with or without outside intervention) is a "national" agenda rather than any form of regional or pan-arabic aspirations. Add to that the disconnection of "Arab Spring" from the aspirations of Palestinian Arabs and the phrase becomes almost meaningless. Even so, the phrase is being used and is being given meaning.
The phrase is being used by respected organisations, for example, Human Rights Watch's Executive Director, Kenneth Roth states: http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2012/time-abandon-autocrats-and-embrace-rights"The Arab Spring is a transformative moment, an historic opportunity for a long-suppressed people to seize control of its destiny. Yet the transformation will not be easy. The people of the region, like everywhere else, deserve the world’s support for their rights as they embark on this long-awaited venture. It is time for the Arab exception to end."
The Arab Spring or Arab Uprising may well be part of a much larger social change movement. "According to research by the Chinese Academy of Governance, the number of protests in China doubled between 2006 and 2010, rising to 180,000 reported 'mass incidents.' The uprisings are responses to myriad issues, primarily official corruption, government land grabs, Tibetan autonomy, and environmental problems."
In Dec 2011, Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev called on Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to resign as tens of thousands of demonstrators cheered opposition leaders and jeered the Kremlin in the biggest show of outrage in Putin's 12-year-rule.
Recent events in the Caucasus, including South Ossetia, Dagestan and Georgia may be an extension of the purported "Arab Uprising" but are excluded because of the regionalisation to the Middle East and North Africa as associated with the concept of "Arab". Events in sub-saharan Africa may similarly be excluded.
As a new contributor, I am unsure of how these highly political aspects should be dealt with. Simply ignoring them does give them a political meaning.
Jonlincbrown ( talk) 17:20, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments.
If you look at the citations for the use of "Arab Spring" the first to use the Title as such is a Jewish Magazine ^ Miller, Aaron. "What Is Israel’s Next Move In The New Middle East?". Moment Magazine. Moment Magazine. http://www.momentmag.com/moment/issues/2011/06/IsraelsNextMove.html. Retrieved 5/6/2011..
Earlier citations use "Arab spring..." and "Arab uprising..." or "Arab awakening...". In English, there is a very important difference.
Look again at the demise of Pan-Arabism and it is given, in part, as the Six Day War in 1967.
Is the promotion of an "Arab Spring" an effort to recreate a new variant of the earlier and flawed Pan-Arabism?
Part of the problem may well be "connectivity" related on my part. Sometimes a page only partially and inconsistently loads, leaving some text missing. That does cause some confusion on my part for which I apologise.
-- Al Ameer son ( talk) 04:06, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree with much that Al Ameer Son says. Journalists are often under pressure to provide short explanations that do not adequately explain social complexities and "Arab Spring" does that though in a very one dimensional way. There is a view from the 'outside looking in' that is different from those opinions held from the 'inside looking out'. Many on the outside looking in do not appreciate or understand how Arab societies used to operate. The population explosion in the Middle East and North Africa has made the less structured but semi-democratic channels of communication much less workable. Hence the grassroot movements that are demanding change and the reqirement for the introduction of more democratic institutions. However, to compare the process with historical events in Europe (see Strafor: "1848: History's Shadow Over the Middle East, By Robert D. Kaplan | March 14, 2012") and to then predict similar outcomes does the situation few favours and provides an ongoing basis for criticism. I still suggest that the pan-Arabism of Nasser (up-down) does the less formal grassroots movement (down-up) a disservice. The grassroots movement will take a long time to achieve many of its objectives but that process is underway and should not be compressed into an encapsulated and stereotyped "moment".
Jonlincbrown ( talk) 13:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
The Arab Network for Human Rights Information claims that the Saudi Arabian protests are spreading through universities, with protests in six different towns around Saudi Arabia in the past two weeks. For the moment this info is only in Timeline_of_the_2011–2012_Saudi_Arabian_protests_(from_January_2012)#Mid-March. If or when enough new or significant info accumulates, then it would make sense to update the lead of that timeline page and more or less copy this updated lead to the timeline summary on 2011–2012_Saudi_Arabian_protests. In turn, updating the lead of 2011–2012_Saudi_Arabian_protests and possibly the corresponding summary of Arab Spring#Saudi Arabia would then be reasonable, IMHO.
As people seem to regularly discover on this article, Arab Spring keeps becoming too long. If people follow my suggestions, then the 2011–2012_Saudi_Arabian_protests article may be able to avoid expanding too fast...
Boud ( talk) 01:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
I've spent a little time looking at various Bahrain entries on Wiki and it seems that this is the page is now to be source of the other Bahrain protest/uprising pages/entries. Makes sense to me.
But I've seen a worrying trend with some of the linking (mainly elsewhere in the other Bahrain articles, but see below). There are often links used that appear to be in there solely to skew the NPOV of the article. Take an innocuous statement like the one in the first paragraph on this page: "To date, . . . civil uprisings have erupted in Bahrain[5]" That's perfectly neutral. Click on the link and it takes you to: "Death turns ‘harmless man’ into Bahrain uprising’s martyr." Now, that's a valid source - AFAIK the Toronto Star is a decent enough paper - but it's unnecessary to bring the emotive aspect into the mix yet (and possibly not necessary later as there's the BICI report to refer to). The actual news item doesn't relate to the big demonstrations nor to (as I'd suggest it should) the initial demonstrations. Reuters is always a pretty good baseline, and this is their article on 14 Feb, "Protester killed in Bahrain 'Day of Rage'" http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/02/14/uk-bahrain-protests-idUKTRE71D1G520110214
Now that's just one link, but I've found many more across the Bahrain articles (along with things like linking to Jew instead of Jewish in the Religion section etc.)
I've also seen a lot of multiple linking. Sometimes it's necessary, but in many cases a single link to the BICI report (with page ref) would give a neutral and more thoroughly researched link than multiple links to various papers/channels. Certainly, where possible, I'd like to avoid linking to BCHR (which I see this article doesn't) as the news source, as they are obviously going to be partial. Just as I'd like to try to avoid linking to government sources (which doesn't appear to be an issue :) ). Bromley86 ( talk) 15:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm just about to undo Bahraini Activist's [ 10:17 21 March 2012] edits. Prior to my edits the Bahrain section displayed bias (general tone, no mention of pro-government demo, GCC troops shot protestors, etc.) and was not consistent with other sections in this article (i.e. too much detail, with 18 lines vs. 17 for Syria and 14 for Libya when those two are more important/intense). Now it's even more NPOV, i.e: emphasises size of opposition protests (an minimises pro-government ones), machine guns, Bloody Thursday, violently cleared etc. Again, compare to Syria & Libya. Some of the inclusions are valid from a neutral point of view, but are probably not valid in this article from a brevity point of view. I'm sure that they must already be in the Main Article on the Bahrain protests.
There's overlinking. The BICI report provides an authoritative source. In my version I did sometimes use news sources at the same time as the BICI report, but only to provide NPOV context. Bahraini Activist's linking is clearly an attempt to tell a story off-article which should rather be dealt with in the Main Article.
Given that I was pointed to this article when I started tidying up the Bahrain article, and given my NPOV concerns, I'd ask that we discuss any changes line by line to reach consensus.
Finally a question. Are those page references irritating? If so, I can move them down to the References, but obviously that'll create ~15 entries there rather than the current single one.
The protests in Bahrain started on 14 February, and were initially aimed at achieving greater political freedom and respect for human rights; they were not intended to directly threaten the monarchy. [2] [3]: 162–3 Lingering frustration among the Shiite majority with being ruled by the Sunni government was a major root cause, but the protests in Tunisia and Egypt are cited as the inspiration for the demonstrations. [2] [3]: 65 The protests were largely peaceful until a pre-dawn raid by police on 17 February to clear protestors from Pearl Roundabout in Manama, in which police killed four protesters. [3]: 73–4 Following the raid, some protesters began to expand their aims to a call for the end of the monarchy. [4] On 18 February army forces opened fire on protesters when they tried to reenter the roundabout, fatally wounding one. [3]: 77–8 The following day protesters reoccupied Pearl Roundabout after the government ordered troops and police to withdraw. [5] [3]: 81 Subsequent days saw large demonstrations; on 21 February a pro-government Gathering of National Unity drew tens of thousands, [3]: 86 [6] whilst on 22 February the number of protestors at the Pearl Roundabout peeked at over 150,000 after more than 100,000 protesters marched there. [3]: 88 On 14 March, Saudi-led GCC forces were requested by the government and entered the country, [3]: 132 which the opposition called an "occupation". [7]
King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa declared a three-month state of emergency on 15 March and asked the military to reassert its control as clashes spread across the country. [8] [3]: 139 On 16 March, armed soldiers and riot police cleared the protesters' camp in the Pearl Roundabout, in which 3 policemen and 3 protesters were reportedly killed. [3]: 133–4 [9] Later, on 18 March, the government tore down Pearl Roundabout monument. [10] [3]: 150 After the lifting of emergency law on 1 June, [11] several large rallies were staged by the opposition parties. [12] Smaller-scale protests and clashes outside of the capital have continued to occur almost daily. [13] [14] On 9 March 2012 over 100,000 protested in what the opposition called "the biggest march in our history". [15] [16]
The police response has been described as a "brutal" crackdown on peaceful and unarmed protestors, including doctors and bloggers. [17] [18] [19] The police carried out midnight house raids in Shia neighbourhoods, beatings at checkpoints, and denial of medical care in a "campaign of intimidation". [20] [21] [22] [23] More than 2,929 people have been arrested, [24] [25] and at least five people died due to torture while in police custody. [3]: 287,288 On 23 November 2011 the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry released its report on its investigation of the events, finding that the government had systematically tortured prisoners and committed other human rights violations. [3]: 415–422 It also rejected the government's claims that the protests were instigated by Iran. [26] Although the report found that systematic torture had stopped, [3]: 417 the Bahraini government has refused entry to several international human rights groups and news organizations, and delayed a visit by a UN inspector. [27] [28] Mohamed CJ (talk) 09:35, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
The protests in Bahrain started on 14 February, and were initially aimed at achieving greater political freedom and respect for human rights; they were not intended to directly threaten the monarchy. [2] [3]: 162–3 Lingering frustration among the Shiite majority with being ruled by the Sunni government was a major root cause, but the protests in Tunisia and Egypt are cited as the inspiration for the demonstrations. [2] [3]: 65 The protests were largely peaceful until a pre-dawn raid by police on 17 February to clear protestors from Pearl Roundabout in Manama, in which police killed four protesters. [3]: 73–4 Following the raid, some protesters began to expand their aims to a call for the end of the monarchy. [4] On 18 February the army opened fire on protesters when they tried to reenter the roundabout, fatally wounding one. [3]: 77–8 The following day protesters reoccupied Pearl Roundabout after the government ordered troops and police to withdraw. [5] [3]: 81 Subsequent days saw large demonstrations; on 21 February a pro-government Gathering of National Unity drew tens of thousands, [29] [3]: 86 whilst on 22 February the number of protestors at the Pearl Roundabout peeked at over 150,000 after more than 100,000 protesters marched there. [3]: 88 On 14 March, in response to the general breakdown in security and law and order, GCC forces were requested by the government and entered the country. [3]: 132 The opposition called this an "occupation". [7]
King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa declared a three-month state of emergency on 15 March and asked the military to reassert its control as clashes spread across the country. [8] [3]: 139 On 16 March, the protesters' camp in the Pearl Roundabout was again cleared [3]: 133–4 and later, on 18 March, the Pearl Roundabout monument was torn down. [10] [3]: 150 After the lifting of emergency law on 1 June, [11] several large rallies were staged by the opposition parties. [12] Smaller-scale protests and clashes outside of the capital have continued to occur almost daily. [14] On 9 March 2012 around 100,000 protested in what the opposition called "the biggest march in our history". [15] [16]
On 23 November 2011 the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry released its report on its investigation of the events of February and March 2011, finding that the government had systematically tortured prisoners and committed other human rights violations. [3]: 415–422 Although the report found that systematic torture had stopped, [3]: 417 the Bahraini government has refused entry to several international human rights groups and delayed a visit by a UN inspector. [28] Bromley86 ( talk) 23:42, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
4) Bromley86's Wikilink suggestion looks good to me, and I can't find a more appropriate article to link to. FormerIP ( talk) 01:06, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Up to here everything is fine (I'll skip anything I agree with), except for protesters number which is four. Yes Isa might had been shot between 4:20 (BICI 74) and 7:30 (BICI 231), but he actually died 12 hours before Ali Ahmed Abdulla Ahmed, was shot by the same police force that evacuated the area and was in the area (returning to it). You might have choose to separate the deaths, but The Guardian, Al Jazeera, ABC News and Ap counted the deaths from the pre-dawn raid as four. For the other point, health minister said 225 were injured ( CNN), but it's alright not to include it.
It looks like everything is already agreed here. FormerIP ( talk) 01:10, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
OK, so everything looks agreed here.
FormerIP (
talk)
01:26, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Change "less than 120,000" to "tens of thousands". BICI said "The number of people was reported to have exceeded 100,000 by 19:30. According to MoI and some media, by 20:30 the number of people participating in this demonstration increased to 400,000, although many other estimates place the number at below 120,000, some of whom were non-residents of Bahrain." I find the report inaccurate here. First the government claimed the number was 300k, not 400k [6]. Second I didn't find any non pro-government reliable sources to back any number nearby 100k. The sources which I found are:
So I think "tens of thousands" is suitable here, if not generous. Also the part about expatriates is well sourced. Mohamed CJ (talk) 21:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Suggest being clearer by attributing a number. Perhaps: "100,000, according to the commission set up by the King following the unrest. As an unprompted comment, I am not too sure about the reference to expats. The way it is phrased gives the suggestion that Wikipedia thinks they are less important - like the demonstration is somehow disappointing if too many Bangladeshis turn up. Maybe some media would think this, but I don't think we should follow that lead. FormerIP ( talk) 01:26, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Keep it as it is. The numbers are taken from BICI and are supported by a big number of reliable sources. Some sources even went up to 200k. The percentage can be removed from here, but it should be kept in the image if this one is removed 150/568 = 26.4%.
Subsequent days saw large demonstrations; on 21 February a pro-government Gathering of National Unity drew tens of thousands, [7] [8] whilst on 22 February the number of protestors at the roundabout peeked at over 150,000 after more than 100,000 protestors marched there. [9] Funnily enough, all the references I found for this were to "tens of thousands" Reuters Al Jaz BBC, but to my mind we stick to the BICI figures. Bromley86 ( talk) 00:33, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
AFACIT, 25% or 20% of the population is mathematically wrong either way. 1.23 million is the population according to...well, whatever Wikipedia has used as a source for that. 25% of that is 307k, more than twice the maximum cited number on the march. Possibly we are talking about the population over a certain age or the non-expat population or something else. But, I would say, if in doubt leave it out.
The sentence used to list only one reason, when BICI listed the 3 above. I would remove all three reasons. Keep Saudi since they sent the biggest numbers and offered the biggest help for government. Remove "reacted strongly". "On 14 March, Saudi-led GCC forces were requested by the government and entered the country,[218](p132) which the opposition called an "occupation".[223]". Mohamed CJ (talk) 21:58, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Saudi should stay because so many sources say Saudi, but so should GCC, because it is also technically accurate and informative for the reader. I don't think the BICI version of the reasons for the request should be taken as gospel, as it is one set of reasons pulled together for a specific purpose. I'm not sure it is necessary to specify any reasons, because the reader will be able to work out what they might be quite easily. Agree with removing "reacted strongly". Calling it an "occupation" is obviously strong. FormerIP ( talk) 01:24, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Merge it with third, since both of them are about human rights violations.
By this I've provided my full detailed review on the section, waiting for yours (hopefully you agree with most, since it was well sourced). You can see that many sentences were removed, which will make this shorter. Mohamed CJ (talk) 23:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I'm volunteering for this. Hope you'll have me. What I will do is go through each of the sections above and add my opinion after yours. I might not do that in one go (quite a lot to chew on, you guys) and I won't comment anywhere that you both haven't. Cheers. FormerIP ( talk) 00:52, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
reutbahdor
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
![]() | 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 5 | ← | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | Archive 14 |
Actually, the correct date for Gaddafi being overthrown is 23 August 2011. Most media sources says about former Libyan leader killed on 20 October 2011, meaning Gaddafi was already overthrown when the rebels took over the Tripoli compound before he was killed in Sirte. AFP, AP and Reuters many more confirm this.
On an unrelated discussion, it is necessary to say "Replacement of the green Libyan flag with the pre-Gaddafi tricolour." this statement? Because I find it that Libya identity has changed more than just changing the flag. Her national anthem, coat of arms, government and other old Libyan identity as well too changed. 60.49.61.211 ( talk) 08:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
The role played by the social networks has been exagerated, especially in Tunisia. (cf. Jean-Pierre Filiu) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.151.180.227 ( talk) 21:08, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
The Arab Spring (Arabic: الربيع العربي; also known as the Arabic Rebellions or the Arab Revolutions) ... major protests in Israel, Algeria, Iraq, ...
I knew it! Sooner or later, the Arabs say: Welcome Israel!
But .... Israel is an Arab country? Ayeff ( talk) 11:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
Hahaha! If I'm a very bias towards the Jews I believe they say Israel is their homeland for Jews. This is a very general fact that Israel is NOT AN Arab country. It was majority Jewish. This goes same thing to Iran and Afghanistan whereby because they are Muslims or placed under Middle East, it does not mean is an Arab country. 60.49.62.246 ( talk) 10:34, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Israel is under Impact of the Arab Spring 60.49.62.246 ( talk) 03:42, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
It's not Israel that's included, it's its border. The Palestinian protests for independence. EkoGraf ( talk) 03:16, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
I think we should point out the fact the lebanese casualities came from clashes between various segment of the population and were not governement related Philoleb ( talk) 19:00, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
After initially trying to copyedit it into grammatical English, I've now completely removed a sentence referring to the Arab Spring as a form of the strategy of tension. This is massively POV, with the suggestion that it is some kind of Western plot, and completely unsupported by the cite given after the sentence below. If people are going to add stuff like this, it needs be cited as an opinion, fully attributed to who is saying it, and to come with cite to reliable sources that confirm this. -- The Anome ( talk) 00:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I notice that the massively POV-pushing "strategy of tension" stuff has been re-added by User:188.29.93.221, which seems to be a one-off use of the IP just for this purpose, by someone who is already familiar with Wikipedia's editing tools. However, since my previous removal of it was less that 24 hours ago, the 1RR rule applying to this article prevents me from removing it again. -- The Anome ( talk) 23:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Interesting. Taking a look at the history of the "strategy of tension" article, there seems to be one particular editor that likes to edit both (and only) this article and the strategy of tension article, from a variety of IP addresses all in the same range. I haven't yet been able to dig out all the occasions when this phrase has been added to this article, but I'm beginning to suspect this may be one single editor at work. -- The Anome ( talk) 02:14, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
Maybe we should keep the Strategy of tension stuff as an opinion, this source clearly mentions it as a technique used in the Arab spring. P.S: I've requested semi-protection for the page. -- Tachfin ( talk) 22:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
Editors are welcome to discuss it here. Greyshark09 ( talk) 22:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
Hey, guys. I just heard something about the Sudanese opposition is trying to form a coalition to topple Omar al-Bashir. On the other hand, protesters just stormed Kuwait parliament. Somebody should keep an eye for these infamous Arab revolt countries. Thank you. 60.49.57.195 ( talk) 14:38, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
After a quick glance at the refs I see some blogs used in citations (e.g. Global voices), don't know how much there is of them so I'm gonna be removing those and other self-published material per WP:BLOGS. (P.S: This does not apply to blogs of respectable media e.g. Guardian, Aljazeera etc)-- Tachfin ( talk) 18:14, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello, people! Who are the vandal's news that hasn't updated such that the Libyan flag has already been changed? Why is the flag reverted to the old Libyan Arab Jamahiriya flag? Change that flag back now! The UN membership already confirms the Kingdom of Libya flag as the legitimate flag already! Do not use the green flag as the current one. Thank you.
60.48.195.249 ( talk) 04:54, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Actually I was looking at the Summary of protests by country country section. My thoughts were that if this is all about country, then why is both Golan Heights and the Western Sahara are considered countries? Golan Heights (Israeli border whatever) is actually a territory, not countries. The same as the Western Sahara. 60.48.195.249 ( talk) 05:23, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
Makes sense. I compare it the same way as World War II belligerent flags as well as the Six-Days War. Thanks for reminding that. 118.100.70.240 ( talk) 11:13, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
On the map, I think it's appropriate to have reasons for why a color for a type of situation is chosen. It appears that blue symbolizes freedom. The countries with the darker blue were able to gain to more freedom and change. Red/Orange on the other hand should symbolize blood. The more red a country, the more violence is occurring in that nation.
Using that logic, then Yemen, Syria, and Bahrain should have a reddish color on the map, because those countries are currently having the relatively high rates of sustained violence.-- Futuretrillionaire ( talk) 02:32, 22 November 2011 (UTC)Futuretrillionaire
Any changes needed to the map? The bigger question is is this a summary map (as it is now) or ongoing events map (most countries quiet, with current violence in Syria, Yemen and Egypt and minor protests in Jordan, Kuwait? Greyshark09 ( talk) 12:14, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
No, I disagree of what you mention about revisit the color scheme. Let me ask you a question, so if the Tunisian Prime Minister Ghannouchi resigns, will you do the same thing? I guess not. The same when Saif al-Islam were captured in Libya. A dictator overthrown is consider a final one. Do not revise it again. The Government Overthrown is the last one. Arab Spring is either all about total change or just demand for governmental changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.100.70.11 ( talk) 08:31, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
PS: Some people have refer to The Economist Arab Spring map, but here in this CNN International, its also a good map showing the coverage in the Arab World:
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2011/arab.unrest/
118.100.70.11 (
talk)
08:45, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Saleh signed the deal agreeing to transfer of powers today, so does that mean Yemen qualifies for a "revolution"? If so, then the article needs to be renamed and the map given the appropriate colours.-- ERAGON ( talk) 17:22, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Kudzu is right. Why is Yemen already black? Because he signs the power transfer deal does not mean its the end of his 33 year rule. He stills has 30 days left to step down.
60.49.60.182 ( talk) 04:44, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
The map changed back to Uprising, but why the Summary of Protests by Country still black? I saw many of the media sources says that "Saleh agrees to step down", which he actually did not step down at all. Who knows at the last minute Saleh will still back away once again? We need to hear his official annoucement (or at least his Vice-President or other important figures) of his hereby resignation. So please do not place it as "Government Overthrown". 118.100.70.11 ( talk) 08:07, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Bahrain should be "Sustained civil disorder and governmental changes" (like in the summary) or "Protests and governmental changes" (like in the map)? At least, the CNN considers Bahrain a situation similar to Yemen and Syria.-- 81.84.110.142 ( talk) 03:37, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Guys from Wikipedia I have a Question: So Saleh sign the deal which means officially he will transfer all his powers to his Vicepresident so he can work to create a Transitional goverment with the opposition, that will be like in December 23.So when that date comes, we can talk about a Revolution??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.29.154.113 ( talk) 17:44, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
The Yemen Post publisher and editor-in-chief Hakim Almasmari once quoted "Tactics are now being gathered by President Saleh to ensure that the power transfer signing only results in more ink on useless paper." To be honest, the GCC deal doesn't really deals anything. Even if Saleh signs it, Saleh still can break his promise by retaining his power. This is not bias but people in the past has usually done that. I'm quite doubful that after these 30 days he will be automatically step down. So even with that, we cannot verify a revolution (or Government Overthrown), unless the Yemeni ruling leaders announce his resignation just like Tunisia's Ben Ali (Prime Minister announces Ben Ali's flees to Saudi Arabia) and Egypt's Mubarak (His vice-president announces Mubarak resignation). Until then, Uprising is still the most common to be used for Yemen. 60.48.196.16 ( talk) 03:27, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
How/where to add it? I've seen several op/eds (e.g. this) about how 1.) the Arab Spring has opened the door for Islamists in formerly secular Arab strongman states and 2.) the West needs to accept this as the will of the people. The latter point is a bit POV, but the former is certainly empirical and should be assessed in this article briefly (per summary style) and in more detail elsewhere. — Justin (koavf)❤ T☮ C☺ M☯ 21:52, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
I just want to make it clear about this. I'm wrong about changing the flag, especially when it comes to Libya. The Summary of Protests by Country country section depicts about the historic country which starts the uprising, not the current one. The thing about flag displayed on Libya is different from this article bcuz this one belongs to an article which talks about history while that Libya talks about the current one (although separate with its history section). Therefore it's true that the war started with the old Libyan flag, not the new one. So don't change the Libyan flag.
In the future, any country's uprising which results in the new flag, like if Syria revolution will win soon, given that the opposition uses their pre-1963 flag, do not attempt to change it in this article. Leave it be the same. If you do not believe what I said then I guess we should hook up all the war articles, like World War I and World War II. Those articles, how did they end up with those old flags?
60.49.56.180 ( talk) 03:18, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I need help from you to update this template. At this point in time, it isn't added into any articles. One of the concerns is that this timeline might get overloaded with text. If that's the case, key events are sufficient. Thanks in advance! Hytar ( talk) 02:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
Over the weekend there was an Islamic inspired riots all over northern Iraqi province of Dohuk. There is already a wikipedia page on it, and I'm wondering if it should also be mentioned here as it is a recent islamic inspired movement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.112.63.195 ( talk) 07:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
(noted here since Day of Rage is not monitored.) Any objection to removing the redirect and instead making a reference link to Arab Spring from the Day of Rage page? Rationale: Other movements have sprung from that event that don't have a Middle East focus. -- DeknMike ( talk) 15:41, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
WE are in the context of the arab spring, it is thus more reasonable to refer to the the palestine/ israel region as occupid palestine. Philoleb ( talk) 05:54, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
Actually putting the Israeli flag for stuff that happened in the Golan heights seems POV. I previously thought that Israel's entry was about the protests that occurred in Tel Aviv, but since it's about the Golan heights (which is recognized as an occupied territory by the U.N or if you hate the term "Occupy", is at least disputed) there should be no flag there. Or it should be included in Syria's entry since the protests happened from the Syrian side to which the Israeli army responded with fire. Nothing inside Israel proper happened a part from the Tel Aviv demonstrations last summer, which it seems, are not considered part of the Arab spring. Tachfin ( talk) 21:58, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I'm new to wikipedia, sorry i screwed up the table Philoleb ( talk) 22:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I removed the Golan Height and the Western Sahara from the Summary of Protests by Country section because they were not countries. They are territories. 60.49.56.153 ( talk) 02:38, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
I disagree of what you said. If so, then why wasn't the Palestinian territories are also part of what you said? It's also a dispute territory between Israelis and the Palestinians, although currently controlled by Israel. And wrong, the information is illegitimate to put Western Sahara and Golan Heights (Israeli border area whatever you like to call) as a country since there are disputes between two countries. If there's no fix ownership then I have to remove it. Besides, if you wanna check Israeli border, one can check the Israeli border through this place and also the Western Sahara in this place too Arab_Spring#Others. 60.49.56.180 ( talk) 02:00, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
Their are various sources including BBC and CNN claiming that Syria maybe inching closer to civil war. Maybe we should change the syrai to red for civil war.
Maybe we should define civil war as any country with a rebel army and government fighting the mainstream army and government.
What about a new map with a more fluid color...
Has anyone thought about posting death rates in the maps.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15769804
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15149133
http://www.newsfeedcentre.co.uk/sky/world-news/un-syria-in-civil-war-as-deaths-exceed-4000/
http://news.yahoo.com/un-syria-state-civil-war-163757327.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/01/us-syria-un-rights-idUSTRE7B01M720111201
Here are some base images that are free to use:
Danalm000 ( talk) 02:49, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
I agree with defining Syria as a country in civil war, however there is really no need to list death rates of any sort.
Scruce ( talk) 20:16, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
I have no very good paint skills and have never done formating in my occasional edits or i'd do it myself but i agree syria is in civil war... or is extremely close... in the last 2 weeks there have been multiple attacks on loyalist forces by the FSA, many casualties.
96.50.10.234 (
talk)
08:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article,
File:Homs Syria Protests 2011 - 03.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 08:19, 10 December 2011 (UTC) |
I don't think Syria should be changed to civil war until the FSA holds a large amount of territory, but I think it should be treated like Libya was before it was called a civil war. It was called an "armed uprising", which I think is quite a fair way to describe the situation in Syria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.62.65 ( talk) 23:31, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
Syria should be changed to a civil war. The reason is that ANY armed uprising is a civil war Ericl ( talk) 14:31, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
A lot of the "current state of protests" sections in the table claim that the protests have been subdued. However, this implies that the government arrested/killed or something along those lines and ended the protests, usually by force. Ended would mean the protests simply died down. The page seems to claim that certain protests were subdued when really the protests just ended. This should be fixed. I'm not an expert on which nations actually did have their protests subdued, so someone else should do it. I also fixed Tunisia, which claimed subdued instead of ended, a few weeks ago as an IP. Dayshade ( talk) 01:44, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
There are several things that need to be updated:
1. The sentence regarding about Ali Abdullah Saleh in the third paragraph of Overview needs to be changed.
2. The map color of Bahrain should change to dark blue.
3. The sentence "As of November 2011" In the same Overview section should change to December.
60.49.63.145 ( talk) 13:38, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
I can't because I'm not an autoconfirm user. So I request somebody with that user to do it. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 05:51, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
why is mohammed bouazizi not mentioned
75.68.82.58 (
talk)
02:13, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Sudan has recently just suffer another small wave of protests because of the dam proposal by the government to build it. Now some are asking for the overthrow of Bashir. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 17:10, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Good idea. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 05:31, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Sudanese activist arrested days after heckling ruling party official.
http://www.sudantribune.com/Sudanese-activist-arrested-days,41152
60.49.63.145 ( talk) 09:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello. Why is the Parties to the civil conflict and Lead figures are placed in the Arab Spring box? This is not a united Arab conflict, rather this is a separate Arab country conflicts. You can't put something like " Riad al-Asaad are allies of Sadiq al-Ahmar" just because they were both opposition leaders. Where is the evidence that Sadiq or Riad are helping each other sides? Likewise who says the King Hamad is the good friend of Muammar Gaddafi and Bashar al-Assad? He blasted both of them and declare as their enemies. Try not to do prejudice where all leaders will unite together and all opposition leaders too. In reality, there are leaders hates another leaders. If you wish to do so then do it at the separate articles but not on this general article. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 05:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
The text of the Bahrain section does not concur with the sources used to justify it. At the end of the first paragraph of the Bahrain section states: "On 14 March, at the request of the Crown Prince, GCC Saudi Arabian troops entered the country,[231] and opened fire on the protesters, several of whom were killed.[232][233]" In the next paragraph, it states: "On 16 March 2011, the protesters' camp in the Pearl Roundabout was evacuated, bulldozed, and set on fire by the Bahraini Defense Force, riot police, and the Peninsula Shield Force, the military arm of the Gulf Cooperation Council, which intervened reportedly at King Hamad's behest.[239]" The articles cited do not support either sentence. They make no claims that Saudi troops were definitely part of the group that opened fire on protestors nor that they were involved in bulldozing the Pearl Monument. Additionally, none of the articles support the (probably true, but still unsourced) claim that the Crown Prince of Bahrain requested the Saudi troops. Finally, there is no evidence in these citations that supports the statement that King Hamad requested either the Saudi intervention in general (though that claim makes sense) nor their participation in razing the protestors' camps. If no one objects, I will change the first sentence to read:
"On 14 March, presumably at the request of the Bahraini government, over 1,000 Saudi Arabian troops entered the country. Operating under the aegis of the Gulf Cooperation Council's Peninsula Shield Force (PSF) the Saudi troops moved to protect Bahraini government facilities [1]. There is no evidence that the Saudi troops fired on protestors [2], although there were rumors of a PSF operation against the protestors [3]. The United Arab Emirates sent 500 police officers to assist Bahraini efforts. [4]."
I will change the second to read: "On 16 March, the Bahraini Defense Force evacuated, bulldozed, and set fire to the protestors' camp at the Pearl Roundabout, killing at least three. [5] [6]"
If anyone can provide sources that support any of the original claims, I'll gladly support leaving them intact.
References
Abu Casey ( talk) 00:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Why are the colors for the Arab countries on the map all so very strange and unorthodox? Shouldn't primary and some secondary colors be used? (e.g. this cartogram- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EU_net_budget_2007-2013_per_capita_cartogram.png) That'd make the map a bit clearer and less eye-weary, as well as conform to normal map standards. Correct me if I'm wrong, I'm no cartographer. As a side note- Mauritania is the only Arab country without its own protest page. Should one be made? Or is nothing of relative importance happening there? Thanks— Mike44456 ( talk) 01:27, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Hello to all Wikipedians and anonymous users. I want to make it clear about the Yemeni upcoming events. There was some preparation of whether Saleh is leaving Yemen so that they will have smooth transition period until the February 2012 presidential elections. In case if anybody thinks about changing it to revolution, I would like to say I reject that. Just because Saleh leaves Yemen it doesn't mean he was overthrown. Like what I have said earlier, somebody from the top ruling officials, be it the Vice-President or Saleh himself, must announce his resignation and it then confirmed by the officials and reliable medias. If that's the case, then we will stick back to square one, where the expecting overthrown date should be 21 February 2012, consider if Saleh plays by the rule stepping down (unless he wants to get out from the deal for the 4th time again). Thank you and have a nice day of editing. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 15:18, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I reverted the page to the last version by User:60.49.63.145, since I know that your edits almost always prove to be constructive, and it struck me as unfair that neither of the editors who reverted you were willing to discuss the issue. (I'm really not happy about having the 1RR applied to this page, the article was only really about the AI conflict because a certain two users made it so, and they haven't reared their heads in ages.)
However I'm not certain I understand your reasoning.
Could you explain further? Thanks, -- Quintucket ( talk) 19:28, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Actually it was my fault for not putting reasons, to be honest. What I meant is that when I try to compare the summaries of that Yemeni uprising with many other websites, I found out that when most of them write in the paragraph form, they just quote it from the January 27 protests (beginning of the protests), and then followed by the Feb 3 "Day of Rage", then followed by the May conflict escalation during the pre-assassination (June 3 attack) time. Since then, not much of special events happen except those daily protests. I mean, necessary to mention all this? Thats why I only remove this sentence:
Since this is not the Yemeni uprising article itself, but rather a summary, would you really need to mention about a person killed by hand grenade, or gunfire, or protesters set fire to a building? These events aren't so special so its not required to put it. Some of these happens in other Arab countries like Egypt, E.G. protesters set fire on the NDP HQ, but it was not stated here. Regardless, the rest of them are all fine.
But don't worry. If you all disagree of what I said, you are welcome to revert it. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 07:55, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
Seems like many people tend to focus more on popular uprisings and revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Yemen, Syria and Bahrain, this is my discovery of those infamous Arab countries which suffer smaller protests. Any edits are welcome, if wish to.
Algeria:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ic2rj6WFjN-Y4BuxjoEoECmPaBRg?docId=CNG.4e49b326c0b56a603281add8e86b2b2d.631
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/12/us-algeria-housing-protests-idUSTRE80B12A20120112
Jordan:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/12/us-algeria-housing-protests-idUSTRE80B12A20120112
60.49.63.145 (
talk)
14:56, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
Damn it! I accidentally paste the wrong link about Jordan. Two self-immolation deaths were reported. http://channel6newsonline.com/2012/01/clashes-erupt-during-pro-reform-protest-in-jordan/
No, I didn't do that. I tend to concentrate more on Yemen and Bahrain. That's why I said everybody are welcome to edit it. But I move that some of the countries like Morocco, Jordan, should not use the word Subdued or Ended since there are still major demonstration going on once a week or months, though not necessary every day. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 08:03, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
I have update many parts of the 2011 Yemeni uprising, but still many needs to be changed. I was hoping that some of the users could join me contribute the editing of Yemeni uprising as many of them are still focusing on the 2011 Syrian uprising and the 2011 Bahraini uprising. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 04:16, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
i've updated several Saudi Arabian parts of this article. This is more less a summary (lead of 2011–2012 Saudi Arabian protests) of summaries (the leads of the 3 individual timelines). My guess is that editors will be tempted to edit this summary directly rather than first adding content to the timeline or other specific articles - or the overall KSA article, and then looking at the thing as a whole to see if the individual events are important enough to require updates in summaries and summary of summaries. People who keep an eye on this article are welcome to shift the edits (with attribution: you should put "from [[Arab Spring]]" in the edit summary for copyright traceability) to the main body of individual KSA-protest-related articles, so that the leads don't get filled with long details about individual incidents (except for the most notable).
Given that there now seems to be a sustained cycle of protests/police shoot dead protestor/funeral/protests/police shoot dead protestor, i suspect that updates will be required quite often on the more specific articles. I don't see any point updating the Arab Spring article every time, though. Boud ( talk) 00:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
In this edit, a template was removed with the edit comment: "Removing template because template size is exceeded". i think this means the problem is having too many templates included in a single article, when all the sub-sub and sub-sub-sub etc. inclusions are carried out. Is this right?
In any case, the "dot" template usage in related-topic templates can be replaced by the listclass=hlist structure. This reduces the number of templates needed by a huge amount, and avoids having to cut/paste or otherwise generate non-ascii characters! i've updated the KSA, Bahrain, and Syria Arab Spring templates this way. The negative side of this change is that the default dots are probably a tiny bit smaller (they were already smaller than the dots in the Egyptian and Libyan templates, i think), but IMHO that's a small price to pay. The dots are really there just for spacing.
My changes probably reduced the number of included templates (dot templates) in Arab Spring by at least 100 (though i haven't counted exactly), without loss of any semantic or syntactic structure, AFAIK. Apologies if something got changed, though i tried to check carefully.
TODO: i'll let someone else do this for the other templates - the rendered change (change visible in a browser window) would be stronger for the Egyptian and Libyan cases, because they have big fat dots (at the moment, anyway).
Boud ( talk) 23:28, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
The country has witnessed its largest political protests ever, there's been violence between demonstrators and security forces, and now the government has resigned: [1] I think it's time to give the 2011 Kuwaiti protests their own page. - Kudzu1 ( talk) 17:24, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
In the death toll table it is mentioned that the count is nil. But I clearly remember there was couple of death cases in early demonstrations of the 'Bedoun' (which mean 'without' as expression of being stateless). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhd196 ( talk • contribs) 18:26, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
This spring is killing hundreds of christians, who became the most persecuted religious group in the world, and the article does not even cite it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.250.57.64 ( talk) 17:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
The anonymous users has "complaint" about we didn't put up the statement regarding persecution of Christians. But before we doing this so, has anyone wants to put up where a Tunisian Jew are allowed to run in elections and no one cares? 60.49.62.66 ( talk) 03:17, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
I just want to discuss about this topic. There are several anonymous users tries to put the end date of the Tunisian Revolution (which later I revert it back to Ongoing). Given that I saw the end date of the Libyan civil war is 23 October 2011, when is the exact end date for the Tunisia and Egypt? How about possible if put 14 January for Tunisia and 11 February for Egypt? 60.49.62.66 ( talk) 03:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
How about saying the day Ben Ali and Mubarak were overthrown are their end date, then making the rest of the incident as post-revolution? I saw one at CNN and the others in The Economist. 60.49.62.66 ( talk) 07:43, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
Little known events taking place in the Maldives. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/asia/2012/02/20122765334806442.html are they related to the Arab Spring?-- Reader1987 ( talk) 09:18, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Maldives is not an Arab state despite its majority being Muslim. Its national language is Dhivehi, a language that is influenced by Indian language. 60.49.60.158 ( talk) 03:32, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
One of the Arab Spring shot just won the World Press Photo award. Should we mention this? 60.49.60.158 ( talk) 05:48, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
Can somebody provide a scholarly citation for calling this "the Arab Awakening"? I have been studying the Middle East for years, and the Arab Spring since its beginning, and I have yet to actually come across somebody seriously coining the events as "Arab Awakening." The Arab Awakening usually refers to this, an Arabist movement that began in the 19th century. I won't remove the label and simply ask for discussion for now, but I will edit the Arab Awakening page from redirect to a disambiguation page. -- Crushti ( talk) 21:44, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
As of January 2012, the link Timeline of the Arab Spring is a red link, but on the search page for it [2], it can be seen that apparently every involved country has its own article on the subject. I think there is motivation for having an overall timeline, potentially including Template:Arab Spring using EasyTimeline. Mikael Häggström ( talk) 15:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Sudan:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/17/us-sudan-arrests-idUSTRE81G1JM20120217
Jordan: (LOL! The demands for ouster of the third King-appointed Prime Minister)
http://presstv.com/detail/227280.html
60.49.60.158 ( talk) 14:24, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
This is the best internet article I have seen on the topic. PPdd ( talk) 02:44, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
It appears that Saleh is mentioned to still be in power while he had signed the GCC initiative and started the transfer of power. Please update the article. I find that the Yemen section is up-to-date but the Overview is not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wsaqaf ( talk • contribs) 11:59, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
Please view this before making such hasty and pre-mature statements:
Talk:Arab_Spring#Yemeni Uprising or Revolution?.
Saleh never steps down. What really happens on November 23 is that Saleh just signed the deal, and agrees to step down only, that means he's not really stepping down yet. Besides, if you check most of the reliable sources and news media they will keep mentioning "...outgoing President Ali Abdullah Saleh..." which is another evidence that he hasn't step down yet. About the power transfer thing, you have already mentioned "started the transfer of power", so he may have transferred 10% of his power, but still there are 90% of the cabinet which he keep to himself. How's that suppose to mean he has step down already? What if he started to break his promise again? Please read this: Talk:Arab_Spring#About Yemen
60.49.63.145 ( talk) 05:29, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
I move that Yemen be changed to light blue on the map (Governmental changes) since Saleh has officially stepped down and the vice president is now in power. This should not be considered a revolution. User: Heresbubba53190
I absolutely disagree with Heresbubba53190's statement. Ben Ali left his prime minister in charge, Mubarak left the armed forces in charge. We still call those revolutions. The 1905 revolution in Russia left the Tsar still in power and we still call the Hungarian Revolution a revolution. Why then, is Yemen not a revolution? User: Dweedman —Preceding undated comment added 23:18, 23 December 2011 (UTC).
For HeadlessMaster, it really doesn't matter if Hadi has ruled Yemen as a VP for 14 to 99 years (just exaggerating saying) but the policy of the Yemeni protesters is to bring down the regime of Ali Abdullah Saleh, which means starting his ouster. If Saleh steps down, then it's consider a government overthrown. Likewise when it comes to Tunisia, when Ben Ali steps down, then although the Prime Minister Ghannouchi who has ruled Tunisia since 1999 has take over, we still call it a Government Overthrown. Saying Hadi takes over Yemen is not consider a Government Overthrown is actually consider a POV (point-of-view). Wikipedia is based on reliable media and sources only.
For Heresbubba53190 and Dweedman, yes the Yemenis are calling it a revolution. They are already asking the overthrow of the regime. Even until now the protesters keep claiming that they want to "continue their revolution", so its irrevelant to call it Governmental Changes. Besides, isn't Yemen has already implementing governmental changes long time ago? That's the reason why we labelled as "Sustained civil disorder and governmental changes".
But nobody has make any official statements such that Saleh has step down, so we cannot call it Government Overthrown for now. We cannot assume that because the GCC deal has expired in December 23 then we can say "Saleh has steps down already". Like I said earlier in this topic. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 03:58, 24 December 2011 (UTC)#
Saleh is gone, as it says in this article, [3] "Since Saleh handed over the reins to his deputy under the Gulf peace accord, a new government headed by an opposition leader has been formed. A presidential election is scheduled for February." Goltak ( talk) 20:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Can't wait for Feburary. Goltak ( talk) 18:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
Okay. If you say so. Sorry for that. Well you could at least tell us that you aren't mean literally about "can't wait for February". After all, we don't know if you simply meant it directly or indirectly.
Its true. While you have that feeling, I guess me too. Because through my analysis the international media does not cover the Yemeni uprising more than the Syrian uprising (which I believe there was an alleged political bias among these medias) so I tend to focus more on Yemen. Tho so I don't have much time to really pay attention to Wikipedia as I have other things to do. Like you, I also want the fall of Ali Abdullah Saleh, and knowing by timeline and analyze you can notice Saleh has better tactics and tricks to stay in power than the defiant late Libyan leader Gaddafi. I may cross the line, so again, sorry for that. 60.49.63.145 ( talk) 15:47, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
No harm done. When can we update the map of political change, I've noticed that it's now outdated, considering Saleh has stepped down and all. Goltak ( talk) 20:00, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
No. The election is on Tuesday, and there are at least 60% turnouts. But the election doesn't signal the end of Ali Abdullah Saleh. I have already gave a link about the Yemen post article, stating that the inauguration of Hadi will be held on next Monday. The inauguration of Hadi only signals the end of Ali Abdullah Saleh. So until then, Saleh still remains as the President of Republic of Yemen, and Hadi was the Acting President of Yemen. No government overthrown yet. 60.49.60.158 ( talk) 04:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
The Yemeni Vice President Abd-Rabbu Mansour Hadi recently won an election to replace Ali Abdullah Saleh as President, should we change it to "Revolution"? 48Lugur ( talk) 02:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
It already won, but there was no inauguration of Hadi as The President of Yemen Republic yet. His inauguration is on the "next week". So Saleh wasn't overthrown yet until Hadi was sweared in.
http://yemenpost.net/Detail123456789.aspx?ID=3&SubID=4778&MainCat=3
60.49.60.158 (
talk)
03:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
News Update: Hadi supposedly is to sworn in next monday, but now he was expected to be sworn in to power by today Saturday morning.
http://yemenpost.net/Detail123456789.aspx?ID=3&SubID=4786&MainCat=3
60.49.60.158 (
talk)
03:25, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Hadi has finally sweared in as the president of Yemen. This marks the overthrown of Ali Abdullah Saleh already. Anybody can now openly edit his post-revolt in Yemen. 60.49.60.158 ( talk) 10:28, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
artillery attacks on a city is far off of civil disorder. -- Reader1987 ( talk) 13:40, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
I know when I was following the Yemeni article, there are a lot of shelling between the Hashid tribes and the Republican Guards. Yet, it was still labelled as uprising. So, it maybe a far off of civil disorder in Syria, but it was still called Uprising. 60.49.60.158 ( talk) 05:24, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
i think that it is time to syria's status to a higher status than Sustained civil disorder Alhanuty ( talk) 02:37, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
The article is way too long — over twice the size of the suggested max. If someone would like to address that (with spin-off articles and sprucing), that would be great. That would make it easier for readers to load and read. The article is already unwieldy and out-of-guidelines large. As an ongoing event, we can anticipate that it will only get longer.
The article is now over 200,000 bytes, making it one of the 300 longest articles at the Project. WP:SIZERULE states: "Some useful rules of thumb ... What to do ... > 100 KB ... Almost certainly should be divided".-- Epeefleche ( talk) 21:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
I totally agree. This article is longer than those on the Revolutions of 1848 and the Napoleonic Wars. This is a problem with Wikipedia: current events are weighed too heavily in importance. This article should be 1/10th the size — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.177.224 ( talk) 02:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
I have a number of concerns about the use of "Arab Spring". Whilst I don't wish to cause any dissent it does seem that this phrase does resonate with and imply a form of pan-arabism. Pan-Arabism has been criticised as being racist, inciting prejudice against and downplaying the role of non-Arab peoples, such as the Berbers, Turks, Jews, Persians, Maronites and many others.
What is forthcoming from those countries that have changed their regimes (with or without outside intervention) is a "national" agenda rather than any form of regional or pan-arabic aspirations. Add to that the disconnection of "Arab Spring" from the aspirations of Palestinian Arabs and the phrase becomes almost meaningless. Even so, the phrase is being used and is being given meaning.
The phrase is being used by respected organisations, for example, Human Rights Watch's Executive Director, Kenneth Roth states: http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2012/time-abandon-autocrats-and-embrace-rights"The Arab Spring is a transformative moment, an historic opportunity for a long-suppressed people to seize control of its destiny. Yet the transformation will not be easy. The people of the region, like everywhere else, deserve the world’s support for their rights as they embark on this long-awaited venture. It is time for the Arab exception to end."
The Arab Spring or Arab Uprising may well be part of a much larger social change movement. "According to research by the Chinese Academy of Governance, the number of protests in China doubled between 2006 and 2010, rising to 180,000 reported 'mass incidents.' The uprisings are responses to myriad issues, primarily official corruption, government land grabs, Tibetan autonomy, and environmental problems."
In Dec 2011, Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev called on Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin to resign as tens of thousands of demonstrators cheered opposition leaders and jeered the Kremlin in the biggest show of outrage in Putin's 12-year-rule.
Recent events in the Caucasus, including South Ossetia, Dagestan and Georgia may be an extension of the purported "Arab Uprising" but are excluded because of the regionalisation to the Middle East and North Africa as associated with the concept of "Arab". Events in sub-saharan Africa may similarly be excluded.
As a new contributor, I am unsure of how these highly political aspects should be dealt with. Simply ignoring them does give them a political meaning.
Jonlincbrown ( talk) 17:20, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments.
If you look at the citations for the use of "Arab Spring" the first to use the Title as such is a Jewish Magazine ^ Miller, Aaron. "What Is Israel’s Next Move In The New Middle East?". Moment Magazine. Moment Magazine. http://www.momentmag.com/moment/issues/2011/06/IsraelsNextMove.html. Retrieved 5/6/2011..
Earlier citations use "Arab spring..." and "Arab uprising..." or "Arab awakening...". In English, there is a very important difference.
Look again at the demise of Pan-Arabism and it is given, in part, as the Six Day War in 1967.
Is the promotion of an "Arab Spring" an effort to recreate a new variant of the earlier and flawed Pan-Arabism?
Part of the problem may well be "connectivity" related on my part. Sometimes a page only partially and inconsistently loads, leaving some text missing. That does cause some confusion on my part for which I apologise.
-- Al Ameer son ( talk) 04:06, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree with much that Al Ameer Son says. Journalists are often under pressure to provide short explanations that do not adequately explain social complexities and "Arab Spring" does that though in a very one dimensional way. There is a view from the 'outside looking in' that is different from those opinions held from the 'inside looking out'. Many on the outside looking in do not appreciate or understand how Arab societies used to operate. The population explosion in the Middle East and North Africa has made the less structured but semi-democratic channels of communication much less workable. Hence the grassroot movements that are demanding change and the reqirement for the introduction of more democratic institutions. However, to compare the process with historical events in Europe (see Strafor: "1848: History's Shadow Over the Middle East, By Robert D. Kaplan | March 14, 2012") and to then predict similar outcomes does the situation few favours and provides an ongoing basis for criticism. I still suggest that the pan-Arabism of Nasser (up-down) does the less formal grassroots movement (down-up) a disservice. The grassroots movement will take a long time to achieve many of its objectives but that process is underway and should not be compressed into an encapsulated and stereotyped "moment".
Jonlincbrown ( talk) 13:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
The Arab Network for Human Rights Information claims that the Saudi Arabian protests are spreading through universities, with protests in six different towns around Saudi Arabia in the past two weeks. For the moment this info is only in Timeline_of_the_2011–2012_Saudi_Arabian_protests_(from_January_2012)#Mid-March. If or when enough new or significant info accumulates, then it would make sense to update the lead of that timeline page and more or less copy this updated lead to the timeline summary on 2011–2012_Saudi_Arabian_protests. In turn, updating the lead of 2011–2012_Saudi_Arabian_protests and possibly the corresponding summary of Arab Spring#Saudi Arabia would then be reasonable, IMHO.
As people seem to regularly discover on this article, Arab Spring keeps becoming too long. If people follow my suggestions, then the 2011–2012_Saudi_Arabian_protests article may be able to avoid expanding too fast...
Boud ( talk) 01:11, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
I've spent a little time looking at various Bahrain entries on Wiki and it seems that this is the page is now to be source of the other Bahrain protest/uprising pages/entries. Makes sense to me.
But I've seen a worrying trend with some of the linking (mainly elsewhere in the other Bahrain articles, but see below). There are often links used that appear to be in there solely to skew the NPOV of the article. Take an innocuous statement like the one in the first paragraph on this page: "To date, . . . civil uprisings have erupted in Bahrain[5]" That's perfectly neutral. Click on the link and it takes you to: "Death turns ‘harmless man’ into Bahrain uprising’s martyr." Now, that's a valid source - AFAIK the Toronto Star is a decent enough paper - but it's unnecessary to bring the emotive aspect into the mix yet (and possibly not necessary later as there's the BICI report to refer to). The actual news item doesn't relate to the big demonstrations nor to (as I'd suggest it should) the initial demonstrations. Reuters is always a pretty good baseline, and this is their article on 14 Feb, "Protester killed in Bahrain 'Day of Rage'" http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/02/14/uk-bahrain-protests-idUKTRE71D1G520110214
Now that's just one link, but I've found many more across the Bahrain articles (along with things like linking to Jew instead of Jewish in the Religion section etc.)
I've also seen a lot of multiple linking. Sometimes it's necessary, but in many cases a single link to the BICI report (with page ref) would give a neutral and more thoroughly researched link than multiple links to various papers/channels. Certainly, where possible, I'd like to avoid linking to BCHR (which I see this article doesn't) as the news source, as they are obviously going to be partial. Just as I'd like to try to avoid linking to government sources (which doesn't appear to be an issue :) ). Bromley86 ( talk) 15:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
I'm just about to undo Bahraini Activist's [ 10:17 21 March 2012] edits. Prior to my edits the Bahrain section displayed bias (general tone, no mention of pro-government demo, GCC troops shot protestors, etc.) and was not consistent with other sections in this article (i.e. too much detail, with 18 lines vs. 17 for Syria and 14 for Libya when those two are more important/intense). Now it's even more NPOV, i.e: emphasises size of opposition protests (an minimises pro-government ones), machine guns, Bloody Thursday, violently cleared etc. Again, compare to Syria & Libya. Some of the inclusions are valid from a neutral point of view, but are probably not valid in this article from a brevity point of view. I'm sure that they must already be in the Main Article on the Bahrain protests.
There's overlinking. The BICI report provides an authoritative source. In my version I did sometimes use news sources at the same time as the BICI report, but only to provide NPOV context. Bahraini Activist's linking is clearly an attempt to tell a story off-article which should rather be dealt with in the Main Article.
Given that I was pointed to this article when I started tidying up the Bahrain article, and given my NPOV concerns, I'd ask that we discuss any changes line by line to reach consensus.
Finally a question. Are those page references irritating? If so, I can move them down to the References, but obviously that'll create ~15 entries there rather than the current single one.
The protests in Bahrain started on 14 February, and were initially aimed at achieving greater political freedom and respect for human rights; they were not intended to directly threaten the monarchy. [2] [3]: 162–3 Lingering frustration among the Shiite majority with being ruled by the Sunni government was a major root cause, but the protests in Tunisia and Egypt are cited as the inspiration for the demonstrations. [2] [3]: 65 The protests were largely peaceful until a pre-dawn raid by police on 17 February to clear protestors from Pearl Roundabout in Manama, in which police killed four protesters. [3]: 73–4 Following the raid, some protesters began to expand their aims to a call for the end of the monarchy. [4] On 18 February army forces opened fire on protesters when they tried to reenter the roundabout, fatally wounding one. [3]: 77–8 The following day protesters reoccupied Pearl Roundabout after the government ordered troops and police to withdraw. [5] [3]: 81 Subsequent days saw large demonstrations; on 21 February a pro-government Gathering of National Unity drew tens of thousands, [3]: 86 [6] whilst on 22 February the number of protestors at the Pearl Roundabout peeked at over 150,000 after more than 100,000 protesters marched there. [3]: 88 On 14 March, Saudi-led GCC forces were requested by the government and entered the country, [3]: 132 which the opposition called an "occupation". [7]
King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa declared a three-month state of emergency on 15 March and asked the military to reassert its control as clashes spread across the country. [8] [3]: 139 On 16 March, armed soldiers and riot police cleared the protesters' camp in the Pearl Roundabout, in which 3 policemen and 3 protesters were reportedly killed. [3]: 133–4 [9] Later, on 18 March, the government tore down Pearl Roundabout monument. [10] [3]: 150 After the lifting of emergency law on 1 June, [11] several large rallies were staged by the opposition parties. [12] Smaller-scale protests and clashes outside of the capital have continued to occur almost daily. [13] [14] On 9 March 2012 over 100,000 protested in what the opposition called "the biggest march in our history". [15] [16]
The police response has been described as a "brutal" crackdown on peaceful and unarmed protestors, including doctors and bloggers. [17] [18] [19] The police carried out midnight house raids in Shia neighbourhoods, beatings at checkpoints, and denial of medical care in a "campaign of intimidation". [20] [21] [22] [23] More than 2,929 people have been arrested, [24] [25] and at least five people died due to torture while in police custody. [3]: 287,288 On 23 November 2011 the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry released its report on its investigation of the events, finding that the government had systematically tortured prisoners and committed other human rights violations. [3]: 415–422 It also rejected the government's claims that the protests were instigated by Iran. [26] Although the report found that systematic torture had stopped, [3]: 417 the Bahraini government has refused entry to several international human rights groups and news organizations, and delayed a visit by a UN inspector. [27] [28] Mohamed CJ (talk) 09:35, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
The protests in Bahrain started on 14 February, and were initially aimed at achieving greater political freedom and respect for human rights; they were not intended to directly threaten the monarchy. [2] [3]: 162–3 Lingering frustration among the Shiite majority with being ruled by the Sunni government was a major root cause, but the protests in Tunisia and Egypt are cited as the inspiration for the demonstrations. [2] [3]: 65 The protests were largely peaceful until a pre-dawn raid by police on 17 February to clear protestors from Pearl Roundabout in Manama, in which police killed four protesters. [3]: 73–4 Following the raid, some protesters began to expand their aims to a call for the end of the monarchy. [4] On 18 February the army opened fire on protesters when they tried to reenter the roundabout, fatally wounding one. [3]: 77–8 The following day protesters reoccupied Pearl Roundabout after the government ordered troops and police to withdraw. [5] [3]: 81 Subsequent days saw large demonstrations; on 21 February a pro-government Gathering of National Unity drew tens of thousands, [29] [3]: 86 whilst on 22 February the number of protestors at the Pearl Roundabout peeked at over 150,000 after more than 100,000 protesters marched there. [3]: 88 On 14 March, in response to the general breakdown in security and law and order, GCC forces were requested by the government and entered the country. [3]: 132 The opposition called this an "occupation". [7]
King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa declared a three-month state of emergency on 15 March and asked the military to reassert its control as clashes spread across the country. [8] [3]: 139 On 16 March, the protesters' camp in the Pearl Roundabout was again cleared [3]: 133–4 and later, on 18 March, the Pearl Roundabout monument was torn down. [10] [3]: 150 After the lifting of emergency law on 1 June, [11] several large rallies were staged by the opposition parties. [12] Smaller-scale protests and clashes outside of the capital have continued to occur almost daily. [14] On 9 March 2012 around 100,000 protested in what the opposition called "the biggest march in our history". [15] [16]
On 23 November 2011 the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry released its report on its investigation of the events of February and March 2011, finding that the government had systematically tortured prisoners and committed other human rights violations. [3]: 415–422 Although the report found that systematic torture had stopped, [3]: 417 the Bahraini government has refused entry to several international human rights groups and delayed a visit by a UN inspector. [28] Bromley86 ( talk) 23:42, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
4) Bromley86's Wikilink suggestion looks good to me, and I can't find a more appropriate article to link to. FormerIP ( talk) 01:06, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Up to here everything is fine (I'll skip anything I agree with), except for protesters number which is four. Yes Isa might had been shot between 4:20 (BICI 74) and 7:30 (BICI 231), but he actually died 12 hours before Ali Ahmed Abdulla Ahmed, was shot by the same police force that evacuated the area and was in the area (returning to it). You might have choose to separate the deaths, but The Guardian, Al Jazeera, ABC News and Ap counted the deaths from the pre-dawn raid as four. For the other point, health minister said 225 were injured ( CNN), but it's alright not to include it.
It looks like everything is already agreed here. FormerIP ( talk) 01:10, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
OK, so everything looks agreed here.
FormerIP (
talk)
01:26, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Change "less than 120,000" to "tens of thousands". BICI said "The number of people was reported to have exceeded 100,000 by 19:30. According to MoI and some media, by 20:30 the number of people participating in this demonstration increased to 400,000, although many other estimates place the number at below 120,000, some of whom were non-residents of Bahrain." I find the report inaccurate here. First the government claimed the number was 300k, not 400k [6]. Second I didn't find any non pro-government reliable sources to back any number nearby 100k. The sources which I found are:
So I think "tens of thousands" is suitable here, if not generous. Also the part about expatriates is well sourced. Mohamed CJ (talk) 21:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Suggest being clearer by attributing a number. Perhaps: "100,000, according to the commission set up by the King following the unrest. As an unprompted comment, I am not too sure about the reference to expats. The way it is phrased gives the suggestion that Wikipedia thinks they are less important - like the demonstration is somehow disappointing if too many Bangladeshis turn up. Maybe some media would think this, but I don't think we should follow that lead. FormerIP ( talk) 01:26, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Keep it as it is. The numbers are taken from BICI and are supported by a big number of reliable sources. Some sources even went up to 200k. The percentage can be removed from here, but it should be kept in the image if this one is removed 150/568 = 26.4%.
Subsequent days saw large demonstrations; on 21 February a pro-government Gathering of National Unity drew tens of thousands, [7] [8] whilst on 22 February the number of protestors at the roundabout peeked at over 150,000 after more than 100,000 protestors marched there. [9] Funnily enough, all the references I found for this were to "tens of thousands" Reuters Al Jaz BBC, but to my mind we stick to the BICI figures. Bromley86 ( talk) 00:33, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
AFACIT, 25% or 20% of the population is mathematically wrong either way. 1.23 million is the population according to...well, whatever Wikipedia has used as a source for that. 25% of that is 307k, more than twice the maximum cited number on the march. Possibly we are talking about the population over a certain age or the non-expat population or something else. But, I would say, if in doubt leave it out.
The sentence used to list only one reason, when BICI listed the 3 above. I would remove all three reasons. Keep Saudi since they sent the biggest numbers and offered the biggest help for government. Remove "reacted strongly". "On 14 March, Saudi-led GCC forces were requested by the government and entered the country,[218](p132) which the opposition called an "occupation".[223]". Mohamed CJ (talk) 21:58, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Saudi should stay because so many sources say Saudi, but so should GCC, because it is also technically accurate and informative for the reader. I don't think the BICI version of the reasons for the request should be taken as gospel, as it is one set of reasons pulled together for a specific purpose. I'm not sure it is necessary to specify any reasons, because the reader will be able to work out what they might be quite easily. Agree with removing "reacted strongly". Calling it an "occupation" is obviously strong. FormerIP ( talk) 01:24, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Merge it with third, since both of them are about human rights violations.
By this I've provided my full detailed review on the section, waiting for yours (hopefully you agree with most, since it was well sourced). You can see that many sentences were removed, which will make this shorter. Mohamed CJ (talk) 23:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi. I'm volunteering for this. Hope you'll have me. What I will do is go through each of the sections above and add my opinion after yours. I might not do that in one go (quite a lot to chew on, you guys) and I won't comment anywhere that you both haven't. Cheers. FormerIP ( talk) 00:52, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
reutbahdor
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).{{
cite news}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Unknown parameter |deadurl=
ignored (|url-status=
suggested) (
help)