Category talk:Disputed territory between Somaliland and Puntland

Infoboxes

I would like to open a discussion here on how the infoboxes should be treated for pages in this category given the territorial dispute. Amirah talk 15:57, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

To reflect both Somaliland and Puntland's claim to the towns/cities/regions in the disputed territory, I suggest that we use a similar format as that used in the Abyei and Abyei (town) articles that are disputed between Sudan and South Sudan. I think this would be fair and neutral to both entities. For instance, the info box lists both Sudan and South Sudan under country. Articles regarding places disputed by Somaliland and Puntland could similarly list Somaliland and Somalia since Puntland is a federal state of Somalia. Shirshore (talk) 00:32, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

@AmirahBreen: @Dabaqabad: @Jacob300: @Siirski: @Heesxiisolehh: @Natalie904: @Madarkis: @Freetrashbox:

Since no objections are raised against my proposal, is everyone okay with going ahead with these edits? Shirshore (talk) 00:09, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Comment: I suggest sticking to the previous version since there is no other better alternative. Both sides have influence in these towns and it can't really be highlighted on an infobox given the fluid situation in some towns with no clear controller.

I also suggest adding an {{efn}} tag right next to Somaliland on the infoboxes of Badhan and Las Khorey that explain that Puntland has significant influence in the towns. This would highlight just how fluid the control of the town is. See the tag next to Somalia on Somalis as an example.

Like I said before on the Lede section; Badhan is not Abyei. Dabaqabad (talk) 09:29, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Just to add, @Shirshore:; you cannot edit articles while discussion is ongoing. I have reverted the articles to the previous version before the edit war. Please refrain from editing until a consensus has been reached. Dabaqabad (talk) 09:33, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: You are always talking under the assumption that East Sanaag and other areas are territory of Somaliland, which is not neutral. On that premise, the discussion will never reach consensus. The BBC has been reporting on this area for a long time, and it is worth noting that the area of "disputed area" has not changed, despite the fact that the effective areas of Somaliland and Puntland have changed. (2010, 2018, 2019) I think it would be useful to edit the same policy for this disputed area. Where Somaliland is in effective control, such as in Las Anod, it should be described as Somaliland; where Puntland is in effective control, such as in Badhan, it should be described as Puntland; and where there is little influence from both sides, such as in Laskolay, it should be described as neither (or just Somalia). The allegiance of each inhabitant will not necessarily be to the country under their effective control, but it is virtually impossible to determine that, so Wikipedia should not take that into account.--Freetrashbox (talk) 10:47, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

The wider regions are part of Somaliland and have been recognized as such by almost all sides (even the Somalian government) so there is no question about neutrality since that's what most sources refer to it as. Puntland does not have effective control over Badhan, the situation over there is too fluid and is not able to be properly covered in the infobox. Therefore, we'd have to go back to the status quo infobox. Everything is in the last discussion

In the last discussion we managed to establish a consensus to uphold this, with 5 out of the 7 people involved agreeing to my suggestions. It is neutral as it describes both Somaliland and Puntland's partial control and influence in these towns. If you don't agree with this it's fine, but you will have to compromise if you do want a consensus where both sides are satisfied, just like how I'm compromising myself. Dabaqabad (talk) 12:33, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a majority rule. You need to show concrete evidence. For example, we need the evidence that the Somali government is saying that East Sanaag is Somaliland territory. Do not list too many, but list a few pieces of solid evidence.--Freetrashbox (talk) 13:11, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: As Freetrashbox states wikipedia is not majority rule. We have to reach consensus to resolve the dispute, and I think we've nearly exhausted our attempts to reach consensus between us. As AmirahBreen has suggested previously I think it might be good if we involve other editors who usually do not edit Wikipedia articles on Somalia/Somaliland. Also the Somali government considers these regions to be part of Puntland. As I previously said to you the MPs that represent these regions in the federal parliament are nominated by Puntland. Shirshore (talk) 19:26, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shirshore: The same goes for you. For the understanding of newcomers to the discussion, please indicate one of the most reliable sources you know.--Freetrashbox (talk) 20:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shirshore: Freetrashbox Wikipedia is indeed based on majority. The majority of the people in the previous discussion agreed to my suggestions. I have already showed proof to both of you.

There is no "East Sanaag", Sanaag is one region that has been recognized as part of Somaliland even by the federal government. Former president of Somalia Hassan Sheikh Mohamud stated his opinion whilst in office that Puntland is made up of two and a half regions (Bari, Nugal and northern Mudug), which goes against Puntland's claim of Sool and Sanaag. ([1], [2])

Furthermore, in preparation for the Somali presidential election of 2017 the communiqué released by the office of Presidency of Somalia regarding Somalia's National Leadership Forum referred to the disputed territory as Gobollada Sool iyo Sanaag ee Soomaaliland (Somaliland's Sool and Sanaag regions). ([3], [4]) Mind you Somalia's National Leadership Forum was chaired by the President of Somalia Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, and attended by the Speaker of Parliament Mohamed Osman Jawari, Prime Minister Omar Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke, Presidents of South West, Galmudug, Hirshabelle, states of Somalia and the Vice President of Puntland state. This should suffice for @Freetrashbox:'s argument.

As dor the MPs; this is due to the fact that Somalia's parliament is based on a 4.5 system, and since the Dhulbahante and Warsangeli clans are part of the same subclan as the Majeerteen they are included under Puntland, this is the case with other federal member states with a clear clan majority (Galmudug, South West e.g). That does not equal Somalia's recognizing it as part of Puntland.

We reached consensus before and I feel like we're just going around circles on a discussion where no side will be satisfied. We're making the same arguments again and again. Dabaqabad (talk) 00:19, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Just to add; bringing editors that don't edit Somalia/Somaliland articles is pointless; most don't have any knowledge on this topic and don't know the context nor the significance of this discussion. Let's keep this local. Dabaqabad (talk) 00:21, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

Hassan Sheikh Mohamud's statement was not about the territory of Somaliland. The wording of 2017 the communiqué is ambiguous and can be interpreted in many ways. In the first place, this is not an account of the territorial extent of Somaliland. There are more direct references to the idea of Somalia. For example, the previous president has acted in a way that supports the Khatumo State.[5] The previous statement about Puntland's territory is consistent with this. The current president has said that he cannot answer questions about Sool and Sanaag. [6] He refuses to agree with either Somaliland or Pundoland. Since you are familiar with this issue, it is unlikely that you do not know these things. Wikipedia is not a court of law. You must strive to reflect what you know in your articles, even if it contradicts your idea.--Freetrashbox (talk) 11:13, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

You're arguing about semantics now. Hassan Sheikh Mohamud explicitly said that Puntland is "two regions and a half" (Bari, Nugaal and Mudug), which goes against its claim. "Acted in a way" is not admissible evidence. The 2017 communique explicitly states "the Sool and Sanaag regions of Somaliland", how is that ambiguous? That's a very clear stance. The Somalian government has referred to both Sool and Sanaag as part of Somaliland as I have proved and as the evidence shows.

Since I cannot convince you, let's wait for other editors with knowledge in this subject and who regularly edit this kind of articles (@Siirski:, @Kzl55:) to show up and give their thoughts. Dabaqabad (talk) 12:38, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

It doesn't matter how many people you get who routinely make the claim that the entire Sanaag is Somaliland territory. You need to show stronger evidence.--Freetrashbox (talk) 13:07, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

@Freetrashbox: It would help if you also give evidence when explaining Wikipedia guidelines. Dabaqabad please see WP:TALKDONTREVERT which says 'The quality of an argument is more important than whether it represents a minority or a majority view.' Consensus has not been reached on which side of the argument is better, but while there is WP:NOCONSENSUS the article is usually left as it is, unless a WP:CCC brings about a new consensus. - Amirah talk

@Dabaqabad: It doesn't really matter if the Somali Federal Government recognises the disputed territory as part of either entity. There are also plenty of times when Government officials also attributed the territory to Puntland. The Government has never really officially endorsed either claim, the best indicator for endorsement would be the nomination of Federal MPs from this region by Puntland, which you do not find acceptable enough to be able to concede. Regardless, whether or not the Federal Government supports either claim does not distinguish the fact that the territory is claimed by both entities. Thus, our argument here is just speculation, let's focus on reaching a consensus over the infloxes please.

I deduce that we all collectively agree our discussion is stagnant and just going round in circles? Let's request a Third Opinion or the other resources of dispute resolution available if you wish. Whatever the outcome may be then we can accept as consensus. Shirshore (talk) 05:57, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: So let me rephrase. It is the original research to explain the relationship between Somaliland and Sanaag/Sool using materials that are not mentioned as either Somaliland or Sanaag/Sool. See WP:NOR.--Freetrashbox (talk) 10:04, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shirshore: So to you MPs being assigned to a region due to clan affiliation is more of a proof than a communique from the very same Somalian government acknowledging the two regions as part of Somaliland? Ogaden tribesmen from eastern Ethiopia are also nominated by Jubaland as federal MPs due to clan affiliation, does that mean the Somali region is suddenly part of Jubaland?

Let us wait for the editors in the previous discussion to give us their thoughts before we proceed.

@Freetrashbox: You're now accusing me of canvassing and accusing experienced editors of POV. I urge you to assume good-faith throughout the discussion and to stop throwing unprovoked accusations.

I also don't see any original research from my end, every single argument of mine is backed by evidence that I have linked.

@AmirahBreen: Thank you for the useful information. I have provided some strong arguments backed by multiple reliable sources so that should be covered as well. Dabaqabad (talk) 20:09, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: Can we agree that the term "Somaliland" is not used in the articles about Hassan Sheikh Mohamud?--Freetrashbox (talk) 20:57, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

@Freetrashbox: In the article that I provided he implies that both regions are part of Somaliland. As no Somalian administration recognizes an "SSC" state, that would make him side with Somaliland by default unless you have anything that points to the contrary? The communique, which explicitly states that "Sool and Sanaag are regions of Somaliland", also backs up my claim.

Let us wait for other editors with knowledge in this subject to give their thoughts. Dabaqabad (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: In order to write a statement for Wikipedia, we must use explicitly stated information. It should not be information that is implied. See WP:NOR. --Freetrashbox (talk) 10:08, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: Do you have any additional explanation for the source about Hassan Sheikh Mohamud? If not, then I would like to consider the source of information about "Somaliland's Sool/Sanaag".--Freetrashbox (talk) 08:36, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: The other editors have not responded although they've been pinged and almost a week has passed, should we proceed to gain a third opinion? Shirshore (talk) 20:10, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: Just as the sentence "Somaliland's Sool and Sanaag regions" has many meanings in English, "Gobollada Sool iyo Sanaag ee Soomaaliland" also means multiple meaning. For examples, There are expressions such as Webiga Indus ee Pakistan[7] and wabiga Ganges ee Hindiya[8] in Somali sentences. Given the context, Webiga Indus ee Pakistan does not mean that "Pakistan owns the entire Indus River", it simply means "the Pakistan part of Indus River." In short, "ee" is a conjunctive word with many uses, so the meaning of "Gobollada Sool iyo Sanaag ee Soomaaliland" is not clear. The sources of information on wikipedia must be clearly stated. See WP:NOR.--Freetrashbox (talk) 11:25, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: You said "Sanaag is one region that has been recognized as part of Somaliland even by the federal government" in the above. Does this mean that there are other countries or organizations besides the Somali federal government that have stated that whole Sanaag is Somaliland territory? What is the country or organization?--Freetrashbox (talk) 21:38, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: To summarize, you consider that The wider regions are part of Somaliland and have been recognized as such by almost all sides (even the Somalian government), and you consider that the strongest evidence for this is Ref[1][2][3][4] in the above. I (Freetraxhbox) consider that Ref.[1][2] is not consistent with WP:NOR because the word "Somaliland" is not used, but you disagree me. I consider that Ref.[3][4] is not consistent with WP:NOR because it uses ambiguous expression, but you disagree me. There is no clear evidence that any country or organization other than the Somali federal government has made such (that whole Sool/Sanaag are part of Somaliland) a claim. Is my understanding of this correct? You can always submit additional evidence, but preferably before we get a third opinion. If you submit additional evidence, I would also like to verify that evidence before getting the third opinion.--Freetrashbox (talk) 12:36, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

My apologies I seem to have forgot to ping everyone from the last discussion. Pinging @Kzl55:, @Madarkis:, @Siirski:, @Koodbuur:, @Ciiseciise007:, @Kangdomkome:, @Siirski: that's all the people who frequently edit Somali-related articles, some for years.

Give them some time to respond before we discuss potentially moving this to Third Opinion. I'll also post a message on their talk pages to let them know as well, I think this missed them

Many thanks, Dabaqabad (talk) 20:40, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Dabaqabad:, thank you for the @ping me.

The Somali government has no sovereignty over these lands and its opinion will not affect them. As explained before, the Somali government does not recognize Somaliland as part of its federal states or a sovereign state. [9] And this means that all Somaliland is completely disputed.

• about my opinion, I suggest that we use a similar format as that used in the Al-Hasakah and Raqqa articles that are uncontrolled. As already reaching consensus with @Shirshore: before

• Clarification There are no regions disputed Rather, districts and some cities in them like Las Khorey District and Buhoodle city. I was following the recent Somaliland elections, according to the sources, no elections were held in Las Khorey and Buhoodle city which is unsafe because it is disputed with Puntland.

• 
  Somaliland municipal elections 2021 map

Greetings to contributors. --Siirski (talk) 21:47, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@Siirski: You are probably confusing a disputed area with a conflict area. There is no direct relationship between being disputed and combat activities. For example, the Senkaku Islands between Japan and China have been under Japanese effective control since 1972, and from 1972 to the present, there has no battle between Japan and China. However, at least on Wikipedia, the island is treated as a disputed area between Japan and China. If you are claiming that only the Somaliland occupied territories in the disputed area claimed by the BBC are no longer disputed area, then you need to provide a source that treats them as such. See WP:CITE.--Freetrashbox (talk) 10:50, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Freetrashbox: I submitted my testimonial with reliable conditions and sources according to WP:CITE but you are being ignored. According to the words of the Somali president Mohamed Abdullahi Farmaajo, he said the five federal member states, namely Puntland, Jubbaland, Southwest, Galmudug and Hirshabelle. foreign policy

• Somalia doesn't seen Somaliland as part of its federal states or a sovereign state.

In regards to the topic: According UNHCA or UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs Sool and Sanaag areas are in Somaliland. See [10], [11], [12] and [13]. --Siirski (talk) 11:55, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Siirski: Don't just list the sources of information, please give the key sentence. I didn 't understand what part of the sources were important to you, but I'll comment on what I felt was important.Source [10]: Jama Musse Jama is a Somalilander [14] and is not neutral on this issue. / Source [11]: I can't find the part you meant. / Source [12]: It is natural for the Somaliland government to be concerned about the security of the territory it claims, but this is not proof that the territory is Somaliland. / Source [12]: I have not been able to find any explanation that the entire area of Sool/Sanaag is Somaliland territory. / Source [13]; Erigavo is a town in Sanaag, a town effectively controlled by Somaliland, so it is only natural that things related to Somaliland would take place there.--Freetrashbox (talk) 12:53, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Freetrashbox:, The Puntland State of Somalia claims Sool and Sanaag, but it does not controlled. Puntland only control only 20% of this regions. According to the VOA or Voice of America, the disputed territories are Some area part of Las Khorey district, Las Anod District and Taleh District Like the article about the Somali Civil War. See [15]

• 
  As this map shows

--Siirski (talk) 14:05, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Siirski: The only thing we can read from the VOA article is that Tukaraq is in a Disputed area. It is not specified whether Las Anod is in a disputed area or not. Las Khorey and Taleh are not described. Don't read anything other than what is clearly stated in the article. See WP:NOR.--Freetrashbox (talk) 09:48, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Pinging @AmirahBreen: @Dabaqabad: @Jacob300: @Siirski: @Natalie904: @Madarkis: @Freetrashbox: @Kzl55:m@Madarkis: @Koodbuur: @Ciiseciise007: @Kangdomkome: I think we have exhausted our arguments here and neither side has conceded. I will request a third opinion. Can you all confirm that you will co-operate with the outcome of the third opinion? personally I'm willing to do so. Shirshore (talk) 18:44, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shirshore: Give the pinged people more time to give their thoughts. You can't just unilaterally request a third opinion when not everyone has had the opportunity to voice their opinions on this subject. Dabaqabad (talk) 20:46, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: Some of these editors including @Kzl55: @Madarkis: @Koodbuur:@Kangdomkome: have not contributed to this discussion from the start, whilst they've had plenty of time to do so. Nonetheless, I doubt that they'd suggest anything other than what you've already argued but it's no issue we can give them more time. Shirshore (talk) 00:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shirshore:, Third Opinion maybe would help, so i agree. --Siirski (talk) 18:29, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi JJ86803536 (talk) 09:44, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shirshore: I think everyone who has participated so far has been co-operating as best they can. The outcome of a third opinion may be that we get some useful impartial advice. It does not necessarily mean that we will reach consensus, but it could help. Any editor can request a third opinion at any time they like, but doing so 'unilaterally' as User:Dabaqabad put it has drawn the process out a bit longer, but I think it has been worth it. The discussion has been going on for some time and all sides have been patient and understanding with each other despite maintaining opposing points of view and still not reaching consensus on every issue. I can understand the benefit of bringing other editors in who have regularly edited the subject area too. It is a benefit to the subject area to have more active editors on board. Inviting them to the discussion and including them is a courtesy. Once they have had a chance to respond then if we present the Third Opinion case together as a group who are co-operating with Wikipedia Guidelines to work together in trying to reach a consensus, that should be the best way of proceeding. That is the best way to get a good response from Third Opinion. User:Dabaqabad do you think we should move forward with it now, or would you like to give it some more time still? Amirah talk 22:14, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

@AmirahBreen: I'd say give it a little more time so the pinged can read through and give their thoughts. Dabaqabad (talk) 12:18, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Dabaqabad: @Shirshore: and thank you for the pings. I am finding it quite difficult to follow along the discussion in this section, and I am unsure where the dispute lies. Can the two of you please specify what suggestions you are proposing and what exactly will be discussed if taken to Third Opinion? Koodbuur (talk) 16:18, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@AmirahBreen: I agree we should present it together as a group. I understand that the Third Opinion would not necessarily mean we will reach consensus, however, considering that this discussion has been on going for a long time I think all of us as editors involved here should accept the outcome as consensus. I for one will concede to that, I hope the other editors will similarly accept it, otherwise it will be very hard for us to ever reach consensus. Shirshore (talk) 21:43, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Koodbuur: The issue is regarding the dispute territory between Somaliland and Puntland. Both entities claim parts of the Sool, Sanaag and Togdheer regions. My argument is that this dispute should be reflected in the infoboxes and lede of articles of towns/cities and regions in the disputed territory. @Dabaqabad: is arguing that we maintain the articles as they are but add efn tag in articles regarding towns and cities were Puntland also has influence. We have discussed the issue at length, first beginning in my user talk page (see section titled consensus). Since we have not be able to reach consensus we are now considering requesting a Third Opinion to maybe help us reach it. Shirshore (talk) 21:56, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shirshore: If no consensus is reached even after the Third Opinion, the Wikipedia Guidelines are to follow WP:NOCONSENSUS (In discussions of proposals to add, modify, or remove material in articles, a lack of consensus commonly results in retaining the version of the article as it was prior to the proposal or bold edit), and also to bare in mind WP:CCC that if previously un-considered arguments or circumstances are introduced then the discussion could be reopened. We cannot agree beforehand that we will accept whatever the outcome of Third Opinion will be. Third Opinion may also result in contributions from editors with opposing points of view. It is not an authority we can go to which will decide for us, it is simply a way of getting previously uninvolved editors to give their opinions, which may help. All we can do is promise to consider the impartial advice which we receive through Third Opinion, and not to try to disrupt the process at all, which I don't think anyone here would do anyway. Amirah talk 12:54, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Here is a direct link to the previous discussion, Previous discussion on Shirshore's talk page Amirah talk 13:01, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

@AmirahBreen: Okay, that's fine. The other editors have had enough time to contribute, I think we should go ahead and request it now. Shirshore (talk) 20:37, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

@AmirahBreen: @Dabaqabad: @Shirshore: @Siirski: I think the controversy continues on the following points: (1) Whether that whole Sanaag (and Sool/Buhoodle District) are regions that has been recognized as part of Somaliland, in most parts of the world. Will the above sources [1]-[4] be sufficient to prove it? (2) The BBC writes that there is a wide disputed area between Somaliland and Somalia (Puntland) (additional source written in 2021 [16]), is this reasonable? Is there any sources to refute this? (3) In current English Wikipedia, of the disputed territories defined by the BBC, only the area run by Puntland is still a disputed area and the area run by Somaliland is no longer a disputed area. Is this correct? Will the above sources [9]-[13] and [15] be sufficient to prove it? If we don't check these at the beginning, we will have problems later on when we decide on the format of the infobox.--Freetrashbox (talk) 23:37, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

@Freetrashbox:, @Shirshore:, @Dabaqabad:, @AmirahBreen: I found an important guide from CIA, says that Republic of Somaliland that now includes the administrative regions of Awdal, Woqooyi Galbeed, Togdheer, Sanaag, and Sool and the regions of Bari, Nugaal, and northern Mudug comprise a neighboring semi-autonomous state of Puntland. See CIA world factbook--Siirski (talk) 14:43, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Siirski: This is just the CIA's analysis of the current situation in Somaliland and Puntland, not the CIA's endorsement of this state of affairs. As we can see from the statement "Puntland disputes its border with Somaliland as it also claims the regions of Sool and Sanaag, and portions of Togdheer", not only Sanaag, but also parts of Sool and Togheer are disputed areas. This is also consistent with the BBC article.--Freetrashbox (talk) 11:50, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Freettashbox Sources are conflicting on the ground and often times the same sources refute themselves. In terms of healthcare facilities(as of Aug 2020): https://reliefweb.int/report/somalia/somalia-health-care-facilities-map-26-august-2020 BBC says the the area is disputed but the government of the UK maps the three regions under SL when it comes to foreign travel(as of July 16 2021): https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/somalia Agencies claim sool sanaag and buuhodle as part of Somalia (Relief Web) and FEWS NET (America) adds the northwest in its forecasts of somalia: https://reliefweb.int/report/somalia/somalia-seasonal-monitor-june-14-2021 NASA lists sanaag as part of 'northern somalia': https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/86292/forests-of-the-cal-madow ISS Africa conducted interviews with the two clans and they have expressed a desire for unity (but have used both sides to their benefit: https://issafrica.org/iss-today/the-various-layers-to-the-somaliland-puntland-discord World Atlas has the disputed regions along with SL categorized as 'Somalia': https://www.worldatlas.com/amp/articles/the-national-parks-of-somalia.html#aoh=16271068637415&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s If your going to go the the third opinion route, it is imperative you provide them with *objective* sources from the ground and international outlets with no political bias (All sides is a good website to cross-check your sources).Cheers. Natalie904 (talk) 06:35, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

@Natalie904: Thank you for the information. Sources should be checked not only for their authority and neutrality, but also for their alignment with the subject matter. Reliefweb source (https://reliefweb.int/report/somalia/somalia-health-care-facilities-map-26-august-2020) shows health care facilities, and UK source (https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/somalia) is a travel safety notice, and reliefweb source-2 (https://reliefweb.int/report/somalia/somalia-seasonal-monitor-june-14-2021) shows seasonal monitor. They are not appropriate for discussing territorial issues. The same goes for the other sources. --Freetrashbox (talk) 11:50, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Lede

I would like to open a discussion here on how the lede sections of articles in this category should fairly reflect the situation regarding the territorial dispute between Puntland and Somaliland. Amirah talk 15:58, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

To reflect both Somaliland and Puntland's claim to the towns/cities/regions in the disputed territory, I suggest that we use a similar format as that used in the Abyei and Abyei (town) articles that are disputed between Sudan and South Sudan. I think this would be fair and neutral to both entities. For instance, if you read the first line of the Abyei (town) article it reads "Abyei (also spelled Abyēy; Arabic: أبيي‎) is a border town currently in the Abyei Area that is disputed by South Sudan and the Sudan.". Articles regarding places disputed by Somaliland and Puntland could similarly begin like this way. Shirshore (talk) 00:30, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

@AmirahBreen: @Dabaqabad: @Jacob300: @Siirski:@Heesxiisolehh: @Natalie904: @Madarkis: @Freetrashbox:

Since no objections are raised against my proposal, is everyone okay with going ahead with these edits? Shirshore (talk) 00:11, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, this seems fairly reasonable and is reflective of the reality on the ground. Go ahead with the edits. Natalie904 (talk) 00:46, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shirshore: It is not in good faith at all to comment and only ping people that oppose when time has passed letting them know you're going ahead with your unpopular edits, not giving us an opportunity to comment and to make it seem that there are no objections.

Anyways, I don't think you can compare Abyei with towns like Badhan and Las Khorey. Abyei is jointly controlled by Sudan and South Sudan with both sides recognizing the joint control, something that is not the case in Badhan and Las Khorey.

I suggest going for the Leposavic approach that I proposed earlier. Since Somaliland is the seceded entity we would have to mark these towns as Somaliland (for example North Kosovo, a Serb majority region in Kosovo controlled by Serbia is still marked as Kosovo to denote the sovereign country, see the towns of Leposavić and Zvečan) This "Leposavic approach" is in line with standard Wikipedia policy. Dabaqabad (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

same as above--Freetrashbox (talk) 10:47, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Comment: Hi @Shirshore:,

Thank you for your message. I think the best way forward is leaving the infoboxes on articles in question as they are. Any further information regarding regarding "control" should be explained and elaborated on in the dedicated "territorial disputes" section. Many thanks Jacob300 (talk) 17:12, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Dabaqabad: Please stop accusing me. I submitted my proposal more than a week ago which should have given the other editors plenty of time to respond. Still, I was not going to act on the edits before others responded with confirmation or objection, hence the '?'. Nonetheless, I still don't believe you're being neutral. The fact that Somaliland is the secessionist entity cannot negate Puntland's claim, this would not be properly informing the readers. Let's come up with a compromise that effectively highlights the dispute and does not elevate one claim over the other. I cannot see a better example to follow than that over abyei (town) or even Doumeira Islands claimed by both Djibouti and Eritrea. As well as the Halaib Triangle disputed by Egypt/Sudan. This seems to be the accepted format regarding disputed territories in the region. Nevertheless, similarly here I would suggest that we include more editors who do not usually edit articles regarding Somalia/Somaliland in the discussion. Shirshore (talk) 19:53, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shirshore: if you want to invite uninvolved editors WP:TALKDONTREVERT has suggestions on doing this and advice about what it can achieve. Also, under WP:OTHERPARENT you will see advice against forum shopping etc. so it is best to pick the most appropriate resource and present the case once only in as neutral a manner possible. There is still no guarantee of reaching consensus even if other editors become involved, but it has been known to help in some cases. Amirah talk 16:38, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

@AmirahBreen: this is helpful, thank you. I think it's best to invite others in the discussion as we have not made much progress in reaching consensus over the issue while several weeks have passed. I would be open to request a Third Opinion unless the opposing editors favour the other means available under WP:TALKDONTREVERT. Shirshore (talk) 06:07, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Shirshore:,

Thank you for the continued discussion to reach a consensus. I think it is important to give the opportunity to those who inputted into the last consensus discussion [[17]], before seeking outside input as they are already familiar with the topic and this may lengthen the discussion further.

The pages in question already have links to the main article [18] and the control of towns should be further explained here. Additionally, in some towns such as Buuhoodle, the situation is even more ambiguous in the fact that Somaliland administers the area and the security apparatus is lead by local communities as opposed to by Puntland. In that case, I think a suitable compromise would be as explained above as well as adding a note in the infobox referring to the fluid "control" and the updating of [19]. Many thanks Jacob300 (talk) 13:17, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I know it has been frustrating about whether we should repeat here what has already been said in the lengthy discussion on User:Shirshore's talk page, but I think it has been worth moving the discussion to the category talk page, which is more neutral ground for everybody. Before seeking outside input, it will help to summarise the issue as accurately and concisely as possible, as there is quite a lot of reading to do and it could be confusing for editors who are not familiar with the subject area. Editors who have been involved in previous discussion and editing of the relevant pages should also be aware that this discussion is continuing here and their input is very welcome as User:Jacob300 has suggested. It is worth pinging them to remind them the discussion is still ongoing. It will help if we are working together to present both sides the case as best we can, if we are to go ahead and take it to one of the resources such as Third Opinion. We can show that discussions have been taken as far as possible withing the group of editors already involved, and we are asking editors who have not yet been involved to contribute too. I know that some of you have reservations about this because of the complexity of the situation and feel that unfamiliarity with the subject area could be a setback, but if done properly there should be nothing to loose. It's also good if after presenting the case clearly we can avoid getting into heated discussion or even arguements on the noticeboard we choose to use (eg. Third Opinion if everyone agrees that is the best), but to show them we are all trying to work together in good faith to resolve any differences. Amirah talk 15:01, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

@AmirahBreen: The other editors had plenty of time to respond, and almost a week has passed. I think we should proceed to gain a third opinion since there's been no objections to this. I and Freetrashbox can summarise the points of contention we've have argued for thus far, similarly Dabaqabad and Jacob300 can concisely put forward their points. Shirshore (talk) 20:17, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shirshore: Please go ahead if you feel a Third Opinion would help to reach consensus. Amirah talk 01:11, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, having read through all the proposed actions, i assent to that of the Leposavic approach as it evidently correlates to these particular towns & villages in question. One in particular being Tukaraq border town who the people share close family lineage with those of puntland but are adherent to somaliland and its borders. This is also the same for majority of these towns which is why the leposavic approach is is best fit.Ciiseciise007 (talk) 10:27, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@AmirahBreen: will do so. Shirshore (talk) 18:46, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@AmirahBreen: now which government controls these towns and cities the Garoowe government or the Hargeisa, If one government has more authority or power in the region then it is theirs to rule, and it should displayed as a city under their control. I happen to see the majority of these cities are inhabited by the Dhulbahante tribe. Now geographically the Dhulbahante region is located in eastern Somaliland. The Dhulbahante region is heavily influenced by the Garroowe government, I think this is where people get stuck. I personally think that these cities and districts should be displayed on the info boxes, and Wikipedia as located in Somaliland, but heavily influenced by Puntland. JJ86803536 (talk) 09:42, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I also think that the Dhulbahante should be able to choose of wether they want to be ruled by the Hargeisa government or Garoowe Government. JJ86803536 (talk) 09:43, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

I have not responded to User:JJ86803536 because their account has been suspended, but I would like to draw the discussion back to focus on the lede. Amirah talk 13:14, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Territorial Dispute (section)

Each article in this category should have a section on the territorial dispute between Puntland and Somalia, with a "Further information" template leading the reader to the Puntland-Somaliland dispute article. Amirah talk 16:01, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Agreed. Dabaqabad (talk) 18:14, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I will cooperate as time permits.--Freetrashbox (talk) 11:05, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Agreed.Shirshore (talk) 00:20, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Third opinion

@AmirahBreen:@Dabaqabad:@Shirshore:@Natalie904:@Jacob300:@Siirski:@Hawkers994:@JJ86803536:@Koodbuur: Since there has been no update for over a month, we will proceed to a third opinion. I'm going to try to explain it as follows, what do you think? I think I extracted the main opinions, but I will correct them if they are missing.

The treatment of infobox about disputed territory between Somaliland and Puntland, in other words, Sanaag, Sool, Buhoodle. For the basis of each opinion, see this page and User talk:Shirshore.

• It clearly states that it is Somaliland territory, and adding an {{efn}} tag right next to explain that Puntland has significant influence in the towns. (Suggestion by User:Dabaqabad)

• It clearly states that it is Somaliland territory, and adding "Control" section to explain that Puntland has significant influence, as likes Al-Hasakah or Raqqa. (Suggestion by User:Siirski)

• Areas effectively controlled by Somaliland will be described as Somaliland, areas effectively controlled by Puntland will be described as Puntland, and areas where the effective ruler is unclear will not be marked with either flag. (Suggestion by User:Freetrashbox)

• Leaving the infoboxes on articles in question as they are. (Suggestion by User:Jacob300)

--Freetrashbox (talk) 04:45, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

@Freetrashbox, AmirahBreen, Dabaqabad, Jacob300, Natalie904, Siirski, and Koodbuur: I agree it's been over a month since our last discussion, we should proceed and gain a third opinion. Shirshore (talk) 06:42, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

@Freetrashbox:, @AmirahBreen:, @Dabaqabad:, @Jacob300: @Natalie904: @Siirski:, @Koodbuur:, @Gebagebo:. The ‘third opinion’ request on this contentious issue is overdue. I will summarise my argument, can all the opposing editors also swiftly summaries their arguments so we can submit it for a third opinion? Thanks, Shirshore (talk) 00:53, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Upon reading up on the conditions in which to request a " Third Opinion". I think a more formal dispute resolution is necessary here as there more than two editors are involved and considering the length of effort to gain consensus thus far. I Will submit the request at the Dispute resolution noticeboard. Shirshore (talk) 00:10, 11 March 2022 (UTC)