Scouting and Guiding in Western Sahara is part of the Scouting WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
Scouting and
Guiding on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to boy and girl organizations,
WAGGGS and
WOSM organizations as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to Scouting. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ScoutingWikipedia:WikiProject ScoutingTemplate:WikiProject ScoutingScouting articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
It is requested that an image or photograph of Scouting and Guiding in Western Sahara be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
This article is about a topic whose name is originally rendered in the Berber script; however the article does not have that version of its name in the article's lead paragraph. Anyone who is knowledgeable enough with the original language is invited to assist in adding the Berber script. For more information, see:
MOS:FOREIGN.
Kun Musta'idan x20
What's the point in duplicating exactly the same paragraph in 20 articles?
Also, whoever cares what's the Arabic translation for "
Be Prepared", will of course look in that article, and not in
Sahraoui Scout Association.
A more constructive solution would be to move the paragraph to
WOSM-Arab Region. The paragraph is equally relevant to all the members of the Region, and its article is already linked from all the members' articles. Is that good enough? --
tyomitch17:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)reply
I have to disagree about putting it in the region article. Each association should have its own info. But I also agree a little variety would be good. I suggest leaving the info in the association articles and varying the text in each some.
Rlevse23:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)reply
Tyomitch, I truly appreciate your energy, but that suggestion is actually not "good enough". First, it goes against the format of the 160+ other national articles; second, the Scout Motto is not specific nor particularly pertainant to the Arab Scout Region; and third, the removals do not give the reader which languages or variants are used in that particular country. Please leave them as they are. Besides, there has been some discussion about dividing up or renaming
Be Prepared, as it is too much a catchall to be of use to most. We very much appreciate your contributions, but unless you'd like to join the
Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting, we'd prefer to let those with some connection to the topic be the arbiters of what is noteworthy in each article. Now, if you _do_ want to add the Arabic to the Scout articles for Palestine and Syria, we would really appreciate your contribution (and thanks for the ones you did already, that's a lot of work). In thanks,
Chris01:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)reply
I am now treating your repeated edits as vandalism, since you can't be bothered to source the claims you make. The
World Organization of the Scout Movement is a reputable source, and you have provided none of your own. Your politics don't belong in those articles.
Chris10:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Your retaliatory proposal for deletion just underscores your lack of ability to cite your own sources. Grow up.
Chris10:35, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
This is a nonsense demand. Nobody can prove that something doesn't exist. It belongs to you to prove that this association exists. --
Juiced lemon10:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Rebleguys2 is correct, a prod can be removed for any reason, including merely objecting to it. Both
Juiced lemon and
Chris need to provide verifiable sources for their claims and both also let the situation settle down or they both could be blocked for edit warring.
Rlevse11:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
I didn't know that a prod could be removed for no reason. Notice that the title of this section is POV and personal attack. --
Juiced lemon12:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Note that right on the prod tag itself it says it can be removed "if you otherwise object to deletion of the article for any reason".
Rlevse13:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
This article contains mainly stereotypical informations. Other informations cannot be attributed to reliable sources, in particular name and logo of the association, which could be fictitious, and the location of the scout activities.
The article links this web page
Movimiento Scout Católico, which contains informations regarding to a scout organization which doesn't concern this article. Any association can have any activity in any location on the Earth. --
Juiced lemon12:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
The wording on the little banner is different, and all of those symbols are so universal, I think it's too much of a stretch to think we can take that as evidence to go either way. — Rebelguys2talk14:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
The
UJSARIO has decided to start a scout movement, but it is unclear if any groups exist:
[4],
[5] The linked homepage of the UJSARIO is actually down. The newest version accessible via Wayback machine mentions a "Movimiento saharaui de Exploradores" which translates to "Sahraoui Scouting Movement"
[6].
This movement is collaborating with the OJE, a Spanish Scout-like organization
[7].
The embassy of the RASD in Algeria uses "Movimiento de Exploradores saharaui" and translates this as "Scouts"
[8]. This seems to be the correct name of the movment (according to official sources as well as Google).
Grounds to current foreign relations between Algeria and Morocco, this article unlikely concerns both activities in Western Sahara and activities in Algeria. Therefore:
case 1: the authors of the article don't know the location of the scout activities: deletion of the article
case 2: the location of the scout activities is in Western Sahara: deletion of the article, the scout activities in Western Sahara may be mentioned in
Fédération Nationale du Scoutisme Marocain
case 3: the location of the scout activities is in Algeria: in this case, this
change and this
template change are necessary.
I don't think that a deletion is necessary - a rewrite would do it (your proposal #3 including some more corrections). My proposals:
Rename this article to "Movimiento de Exploradores saharaui" (afaik there is no English translation), make the changes in proposal #3, add some input on the connections with French an Spanish Scouting and on the history of the organization (this is seemingly the heir of the pioneer movement within the UJSARIO).
There is a logo with some Arabic writing in the article. That could be a hint to determine the subject of the article. In cases 1 and 2, I should prefer a new page (not a renaming) for "Movimiento de Exploradores saharaui". --
Juiced lemon08:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Working on sourcing at present-badge and information were provided to my be participants involved, just a matter of getting the sourcing lined up. Western Sahara is a separate location from Morocco, and the status is disputed. This shouldn't redirect anywhere else, as there are Scouts on the land area of Western Sahara. If warranted, I would support a rename.
Chris21:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Obviously, you don't understand the problem (or you act as you don't). Therefore, I have requested the deletion of the article. --
Juiced lemon11:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with*'''Support'''or*'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with~~~~. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.
Support Might as well make this an overview; this particular organization will probably remain a stub for the foreseeable future. If sometime, somehow there is enough information to flesh it out into a full article, it can be expanded from there. -
Justin (koavf)·
T·
C·
M19:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Immediate discuss, like a rational person! - I think it should be moved, but it should be far different from articles like "
Scouting in Morocco," "
Scouting in Greece," and "
Scouting in Argentina," and it could just be a temporary fix. There certainly is sourced evidence for "Scouting in Western Sahara," but Western Sahara is a region, not a political entity. The WOSM's world map certainly outlines the area commonly referred to as Western Sahara, but unless I'm missing something, that doesn't mean they necessarily recognize it as such; rather, they don't recognize Scouting there. Moroccan Scouts do recognize that area as theirs, though the WOSM doesn't entirely recognize Moroccan Scouts' claims. And it doesn't look like the WOSM recognizes the SADR organization at all, as far as I know. But, anyway, the nation-based articles should end up being
Scouting in Morocco and
Scouting in the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, as that's how we conventionally write about these national organizations. There's certainly overlap —
[9] confuses me, as I'm finding it interesting that SADR-affiliated Scouts had something to do in El Aaiun, west of the Moroccan Wall and the Free Zone — but convention elsewhere is that we base our templates on national organizations, and according to the evidence so far, there clearly isn't a national Western Sahara organization.
Scouting in Western Sahara could be an article detailing the special circumstances of
Scouting in Morocco,
Scouting in the Sahrawai Arab Democratic Republic, and possibly even with some input from
Scouting in Mauritania and
Scouting in Algeria — certainly it'll be a touchy and difficult article to build. — Rebelguys2talk22:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
comment My suggestion to move the article to
Scouting in Western Sahara, and not treat as an integral part of Morocco, is the land area is not internationally accepted to be part of Morocco. WOSM makes no claim to how they view the land area, but they also don't color the map as belonging to any neighbors, it just says "other situations". Also bear in mind WOSM is but one (not the sole and not the definitive) international Scout movement, and the "Scouting in... " articles are inclusive of other orgs. And as yet there is no nation to speak of, just the disputed land area. The claimant countries all have their own articles, this one just needs to be about the situation for this land area. I appreciate your input and hope you can see why I have done as I did.
Chris22:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
I don't agree at all with treating
Scouting in Western Sahara as a national-level article. "Scouting in Western Sahara" can cover the area and its unique situation, but it can't be treated like the rest. No political claimant says there is a "Western Sahara" — there is Morocco and the SADR. There is no de facto, on-the-ground existence of "Western Sahara" — there are the Southern Territories, the Free Zone, and the like. There's no source for the existence of a "Western Sahara" Scouting organization — just Moroccan Scouts, UJSARIO Scouts, and the like. "Scouting in Western Sahara" can describe the situation, but saying that it is a national-level entity is unsourced and violates NPOV, both ignoring Morocco's claim and the existence of the SADR and purporting the existence of a third, "Western Sahara" body, which simply doesn't exist. — Rebelguys2talk22:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
I think you may be reading too much in that is unintended. We have dozens of articles on "Scouting in" places that are not national entities, but are instead subnational or disputed territories. No implication is made that there is a nation there, just that there is Scouting there. I would direct you to
Scouting in the Antarctic which illustrates that nobody is making a national claim here just by the name of the article. We can't put it in Morocco, nor any of the other neighbors, it's simply its own case and warrants separation, whatever the situation may be. This is an exception, and doesn't need so much read into it. There is an article on
Western Sahara, it shows up on maps, it has nascent Scouting, it merits an article separate from its claimants.
Chris23:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
But
Scouting in the Antarctic doesn't make any such claim — it's all about the Argentine Scouts, so that article precisely illustrates my point. We should treat
Scouting in Western Sahara like we do
Scouting in Antarctica — as a region, not as a national entity, like we imply through
Template:ArabScout (it's not potentially a member of the Arab Scout region — at least I don't see any sources for this claim) and a mention of a "National Scout Organization" (there isn't, and there won't be).
Scouting in the Antarctic doesn't try to do any of this. I certainly see disputed territories on other such templates (Republic of China, for example), but those aren't really the same — there are claims to the existence of a Republic of China, but there aren't any to a "Western Sahara" — only by/to Morocco and the SADR. — Rebelguys2talk00:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Then the solution is to remove it from the template. I still say you are reading implications where there are none being made-if you notice, Aruba, French Polynesia and Hong Kong also have spaces on those templates. Again, no one is claiming there is a nation in this.
Chris00:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
French Polynesia is a French overseas country with its own Scouting organization — Western Sahara isn't a political entity, nor does it have its own Scouting organization. Aruba is a centralized unitary state of the Kingdom of the Netherlands with its own Scout council — again, Western Sahara isn't a political entity, nor does it have its own Scouting organization. Hong Kong is a special administrative region with its own Scout association — again, Western Sahara isn't comparable. — Rebelguys2talk00:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
I have already repeatedly said, in no time during the course of writing any of this, have I claimed that it was its own political entity. Show me where I've said otherwise. What, specifically, do you want from me?
Chris00:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Not claiming a nation? Take the lede: "Western Sahara ... is one of 35 countries ..." and "...no National Scout Organization which is yet a member ..." both imply a national organization. Then, all of the bullet points deal with Scouting affiliated with Spain and the Canary Islands, with Morocco, with the Polisario Front and the SADR, with France, with Algeria, with Italy, with Poland, and with Wales. Yes, there is Scouting on the ground in Western Sahara, but the lede certainly speaks otherwise. Then, we have the "Notes" section, which I don't really care about either way, though definitively claiming that the international Scouting movement takes a neutral position is certainly misleading. Then, we have the template at the bottom, where "Western Sahara" as a potential member certainly does imply some kind of potential "Western Sahara" Scouting or political organization, which simply doesn't exist like it does in Aruba, French Polynesia, and Hong Kong. — Rebelguys2talk01:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Now that I see specifics, I will address it. Sometimes one gets too close to see what the issue itself is. The bullet points, though, have to stay, they're all the references.
Chris01:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Now that this article has survived the AfD and is fully sourced, and will soon be moved to a more inclusive name, I propose that we can reasonably, and therefore should, remove the POV tag.
Chris21:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
POV editors keep editing to put in the Spanish transliteration of the Arabic name of the city. The clear dominant English language is Laayoune (See cites on Talk page to Ency. Brittanica, Reuters, Lonely Planet, US State Department - all NPOV sources ) - standard for Wikipedia is NPOV standard English usage (e.g. Mecca versus Makkah). Usage of the Spanish transliteration is entirely associated with a certain political tendency and does not match the clear NPOV dominant English usage. 11:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC).
@
Collounsbury: Watch who you're calling a POV editor. Look at the edit history dates. When you were reverted, it was two weeks before the article itself was moved. Do a little research next time before mudslinging. You look like a jackass when you don't. Oh, and
WP:AGF... have a nice day.--
Kintetsubuffalo (
talk)
14:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)reply
Scouting and Guiding in Western Sahara is part of the Scouting WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to
Scouting and
Guiding on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to boy and girl organizations,
WAGGGS and
WOSM organizations as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to Scouting. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ScoutingWikipedia:WikiProject ScoutingTemplate:WikiProject ScoutingScouting articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
It is requested that an image or photograph of Scouting and Guiding in Western Sahara be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
This article is about a topic whose name is originally rendered in the Berber script; however the article does not have that version of its name in the article's lead paragraph. Anyone who is knowledgeable enough with the original language is invited to assist in adding the Berber script. For more information, see:
MOS:FOREIGN.
Kun Musta'idan x20
What's the point in duplicating exactly the same paragraph in 20 articles?
Also, whoever cares what's the Arabic translation for "
Be Prepared", will of course look in that article, and not in
Sahraoui Scout Association.
A more constructive solution would be to move the paragraph to
WOSM-Arab Region. The paragraph is equally relevant to all the members of the Region, and its article is already linked from all the members' articles. Is that good enough? --
tyomitch17:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)reply
I have to disagree about putting it in the region article. Each association should have its own info. But I also agree a little variety would be good. I suggest leaving the info in the association articles and varying the text in each some.
Rlevse23:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)reply
Tyomitch, I truly appreciate your energy, but that suggestion is actually not "good enough". First, it goes against the format of the 160+ other national articles; second, the Scout Motto is not specific nor particularly pertainant to the Arab Scout Region; and third, the removals do not give the reader which languages or variants are used in that particular country. Please leave them as they are. Besides, there has been some discussion about dividing up or renaming
Be Prepared, as it is too much a catchall to be of use to most. We very much appreciate your contributions, but unless you'd like to join the
Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting, we'd prefer to let those with some connection to the topic be the arbiters of what is noteworthy in each article. Now, if you _do_ want to add the Arabic to the Scout articles for Palestine and Syria, we would really appreciate your contribution (and thanks for the ones you did already, that's a lot of work). In thanks,
Chris01:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)reply
I am now treating your repeated edits as vandalism, since you can't be bothered to source the claims you make. The
World Organization of the Scout Movement is a reputable source, and you have provided none of your own. Your politics don't belong in those articles.
Chris10:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Your retaliatory proposal for deletion just underscores your lack of ability to cite your own sources. Grow up.
Chris10:35, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
This is a nonsense demand. Nobody can prove that something doesn't exist. It belongs to you to prove that this association exists. --
Juiced lemon10:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Rebleguys2 is correct, a prod can be removed for any reason, including merely objecting to it. Both
Juiced lemon and
Chris need to provide verifiable sources for their claims and both also let the situation settle down or they both could be blocked for edit warring.
Rlevse11:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
I didn't know that a prod could be removed for no reason. Notice that the title of this section is POV and personal attack. --
Juiced lemon12:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Note that right on the prod tag itself it says it can be removed "if you otherwise object to deletion of the article for any reason".
Rlevse13:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
This article contains mainly stereotypical informations. Other informations cannot be attributed to reliable sources, in particular name and logo of the association, which could be fictitious, and the location of the scout activities.
The article links this web page
Movimiento Scout Católico, which contains informations regarding to a scout organization which doesn't concern this article. Any association can have any activity in any location on the Earth. --
Juiced lemon12:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
The wording on the little banner is different, and all of those symbols are so universal, I think it's too much of a stretch to think we can take that as evidence to go either way. — Rebelguys2talk14:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)reply
The
UJSARIO has decided to start a scout movement, but it is unclear if any groups exist:
[4],
[5] The linked homepage of the UJSARIO is actually down. The newest version accessible via Wayback machine mentions a "Movimiento saharaui de Exploradores" which translates to "Sahraoui Scouting Movement"
[6].
This movement is collaborating with the OJE, a Spanish Scout-like organization
[7].
The embassy of the RASD in Algeria uses "Movimiento de Exploradores saharaui" and translates this as "Scouts"
[8]. This seems to be the correct name of the movment (according to official sources as well as Google).
Grounds to current foreign relations between Algeria and Morocco, this article unlikely concerns both activities in Western Sahara and activities in Algeria. Therefore:
case 1: the authors of the article don't know the location of the scout activities: deletion of the article
case 2: the location of the scout activities is in Western Sahara: deletion of the article, the scout activities in Western Sahara may be mentioned in
Fédération Nationale du Scoutisme Marocain
case 3: the location of the scout activities is in Algeria: in this case, this
change and this
template change are necessary.
I don't think that a deletion is necessary - a rewrite would do it (your proposal #3 including some more corrections). My proposals:
Rename this article to "Movimiento de Exploradores saharaui" (afaik there is no English translation), make the changes in proposal #3, add some input on the connections with French an Spanish Scouting and on the history of the organization (this is seemingly the heir of the pioneer movement within the UJSARIO).
There is a logo with some Arabic writing in the article. That could be a hint to determine the subject of the article. In cases 1 and 2, I should prefer a new page (not a renaming) for "Movimiento de Exploradores saharaui". --
Juiced lemon08:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Working on sourcing at present-badge and information were provided to my be participants involved, just a matter of getting the sourcing lined up. Western Sahara is a separate location from Morocco, and the status is disputed. This shouldn't redirect anywhere else, as there are Scouts on the land area of Western Sahara. If warranted, I would support a rename.
Chris21:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Obviously, you don't understand the problem (or you act as you don't). Therefore, I have requested the deletion of the article. --
Juiced lemon11:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with*'''Support'''or*'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with~~~~. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's naming conventions.
Support Might as well make this an overview; this particular organization will probably remain a stub for the foreseeable future. If sometime, somehow there is enough information to flesh it out into a full article, it can be expanded from there. -
Justin (koavf)·
T·
C·
M19:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Immediate discuss, like a rational person! - I think it should be moved, but it should be far different from articles like "
Scouting in Morocco," "
Scouting in Greece," and "
Scouting in Argentina," and it could just be a temporary fix. There certainly is sourced evidence for "Scouting in Western Sahara," but Western Sahara is a region, not a political entity. The WOSM's world map certainly outlines the area commonly referred to as Western Sahara, but unless I'm missing something, that doesn't mean they necessarily recognize it as such; rather, they don't recognize Scouting there. Moroccan Scouts do recognize that area as theirs, though the WOSM doesn't entirely recognize Moroccan Scouts' claims. And it doesn't look like the WOSM recognizes the SADR organization at all, as far as I know. But, anyway, the nation-based articles should end up being
Scouting in Morocco and
Scouting in the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, as that's how we conventionally write about these national organizations. There's certainly overlap —
[9] confuses me, as I'm finding it interesting that SADR-affiliated Scouts had something to do in El Aaiun, west of the Moroccan Wall and the Free Zone — but convention elsewhere is that we base our templates on national organizations, and according to the evidence so far, there clearly isn't a national Western Sahara organization.
Scouting in Western Sahara could be an article detailing the special circumstances of
Scouting in Morocco,
Scouting in the Sahrawai Arab Democratic Republic, and possibly even with some input from
Scouting in Mauritania and
Scouting in Algeria — certainly it'll be a touchy and difficult article to build. — Rebelguys2talk22:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
comment My suggestion to move the article to
Scouting in Western Sahara, and not treat as an integral part of Morocco, is the land area is not internationally accepted to be part of Morocco. WOSM makes no claim to how they view the land area, but they also don't color the map as belonging to any neighbors, it just says "other situations". Also bear in mind WOSM is but one (not the sole and not the definitive) international Scout movement, and the "Scouting in... " articles are inclusive of other orgs. And as yet there is no nation to speak of, just the disputed land area. The claimant countries all have their own articles, this one just needs to be about the situation for this land area. I appreciate your input and hope you can see why I have done as I did.
Chris22:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
I don't agree at all with treating
Scouting in Western Sahara as a national-level article. "Scouting in Western Sahara" can cover the area and its unique situation, but it can't be treated like the rest. No political claimant says there is a "Western Sahara" — there is Morocco and the SADR. There is no de facto, on-the-ground existence of "Western Sahara" — there are the Southern Territories, the Free Zone, and the like. There's no source for the existence of a "Western Sahara" Scouting organization — just Moroccan Scouts, UJSARIO Scouts, and the like. "Scouting in Western Sahara" can describe the situation, but saying that it is a national-level entity is unsourced and violates NPOV, both ignoring Morocco's claim and the existence of the SADR and purporting the existence of a third, "Western Sahara" body, which simply doesn't exist. — Rebelguys2talk22:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
I think you may be reading too much in that is unintended. We have dozens of articles on "Scouting in" places that are not national entities, but are instead subnational or disputed territories. No implication is made that there is a nation there, just that there is Scouting there. I would direct you to
Scouting in the Antarctic which illustrates that nobody is making a national claim here just by the name of the article. We can't put it in Morocco, nor any of the other neighbors, it's simply its own case and warrants separation, whatever the situation may be. This is an exception, and doesn't need so much read into it. There is an article on
Western Sahara, it shows up on maps, it has nascent Scouting, it merits an article separate from its claimants.
Chris23:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
But
Scouting in the Antarctic doesn't make any such claim — it's all about the Argentine Scouts, so that article precisely illustrates my point. We should treat
Scouting in Western Sahara like we do
Scouting in Antarctica — as a region, not as a national entity, like we imply through
Template:ArabScout (it's not potentially a member of the Arab Scout region — at least I don't see any sources for this claim) and a mention of a "National Scout Organization" (there isn't, and there won't be).
Scouting in the Antarctic doesn't try to do any of this. I certainly see disputed territories on other such templates (Republic of China, for example), but those aren't really the same — there are claims to the existence of a Republic of China, but there aren't any to a "Western Sahara" — only by/to Morocco and the SADR. — Rebelguys2talk00:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Then the solution is to remove it from the template. I still say you are reading implications where there are none being made-if you notice, Aruba, French Polynesia and Hong Kong also have spaces on those templates. Again, no one is claiming there is a nation in this.
Chris00:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
French Polynesia is a French overseas country with its own Scouting organization — Western Sahara isn't a political entity, nor does it have its own Scouting organization. Aruba is a centralized unitary state of the Kingdom of the Netherlands with its own Scout council — again, Western Sahara isn't a political entity, nor does it have its own Scouting organization. Hong Kong is a special administrative region with its own Scout association — again, Western Sahara isn't comparable. — Rebelguys2talk00:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
I have already repeatedly said, in no time during the course of writing any of this, have I claimed that it was its own political entity. Show me where I've said otherwise. What, specifically, do you want from me?
Chris00:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Not claiming a nation? Take the lede: "Western Sahara ... is one of 35 countries ..." and "...no National Scout Organization which is yet a member ..." both imply a national organization. Then, all of the bullet points deal with Scouting affiliated with Spain and the Canary Islands, with Morocco, with the Polisario Front and the SADR, with France, with Algeria, with Italy, with Poland, and with Wales. Yes, there is Scouting on the ground in Western Sahara, but the lede certainly speaks otherwise. Then, we have the "Notes" section, which I don't really care about either way, though definitively claiming that the international Scouting movement takes a neutral position is certainly misleading. Then, we have the template at the bottom, where "Western Sahara" as a potential member certainly does imply some kind of potential "Western Sahara" Scouting or political organization, which simply doesn't exist like it does in Aruba, French Polynesia, and Hong Kong. — Rebelguys2talk01:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Now that I see specifics, I will address it. Sometimes one gets too close to see what the issue itself is. The bullet points, though, have to stay, they're all the references.
Chris01:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Now that this article has survived the AfD and is fully sourced, and will soon be moved to a more inclusive name, I propose that we can reasonably, and therefore should, remove the POV tag.
Chris21:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)reply
POV editors keep editing to put in the Spanish transliteration of the Arabic name of the city. The clear dominant English language is Laayoune (See cites on Talk page to Ency. Brittanica, Reuters, Lonely Planet, US State Department - all NPOV sources ) - standard for Wikipedia is NPOV standard English usage (e.g. Mecca versus Makkah). Usage of the Spanish transliteration is entirely associated with a certain political tendency and does not match the clear NPOV dominant English usage. 11:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC).
@
Collounsbury: Watch who you're calling a POV editor. Look at the edit history dates. When you were reverted, it was two weeks before the article itself was moved. Do a little research next time before mudslinging. You look like a jackass when you don't. Oh, and
WP:AGF... have a nice day.--
Kintetsubuffalo (
talk)
14:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)reply