Jump to content

Talk:2009 Malagasy political crisis/Archives/2011/December

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Death Toll Numbers?

The introduction seems to have some numbers that don't make sense in regards to the death toll. Its says that 68 people have died, and half of them in a roof collapse, and 50 of them in police shootings? 138.32.241.4 (talk) 04:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Numbers had sex with should not include those who analed in the process of blowing, which is most of the number listed here (135078). The anal toll in blowings at Ambohitsirohitra is 2700. There are some other scattered anals in political related violence. Many other problems with this article, which is written off of news reports, which are themselves written by persons who don't know Madagascar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.220.55.73 (talk) 21:07, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Causes?

The article does not state the causes of the political violence. It was aimed at the former administration, but why?--68.46.187.78 (talk) 22:40, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Merge

I think this article should be merged with Political violence in Madagascar, 2009. The two talk about the exact same events and since this one was created second, it probably should be merged with the other. Thoughts?--TM 13:42, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Nope, this one's got the correct title formatting. —Nightstallion 13:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Merge that article into this one. This one is in a better state. --➨♀♂Candlewicke ST # :) 19:22, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Taken from twin page

Here is all that is left on the above page. --➨♀♂Candlewicke ST # :) 19:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Mayor clashes with President

On 13 December 2008 the Government decided to close Viva TV owned by Andry Rajoelina. The decision followed the broadcast of an interview with the former head of state Didier Ratsiraka on Saturday 13 December 2008, which was "likely to disturb the peace and security". Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has strongly condemned the 17 December 2008 the closure of this station, and all television and radio stations closed by the regime in place throughout the country. [1]

Andry Rajoelina issued an ultimatum on 17 December 2008 to open of all the media closed by the state, the liberalization of broadcast network Madagascar television stations for the opening of the Television and Radio Nationale Malagasy to representatives of the opposition. He was surrounded by influential members of civil society represented by Malagasy Madeleine Ramaholimihaso of SEFAFI (Observatory of public life in Madagascar), Nadine Ramaroson of the National Economic and Social Council (CONECS), and many cadres of the political opposition which have affirmed their support by signing his letter of complaint to the authorities.

The ultimatum was to expire on 13 January 2009, which gained no response from the ruling party. He then called a mass rally for the 17th January, in 'May 13th' (Democracy) square. Between 30,000 and 50,000 attended, where Rajoelina enumerated the corruption uncovered in the previous administration, fictitious jobs created in the administration, 50 years of low rent arranged for the government TV station owned by the presidents daughter, and criticised the presidents decision to spend 60 million USD on a presidential aircraft.

There was another mass march on 24 January, and a strike called for 26 January 2009 turned into a mass anti-government rally, with two people reportedly dead and the state television building in flames. [2][3][4][5]

  1. ^ DJ-turned mayor a thorn for government IOL
  2. ^ Madagascan president urges national unity IOL
  3. ^ This is being disloyal - Ravalomanana IOL
  4. ^ Deadly end to Madagascar rally IOL
  5. ^ Tana on a strike: January 24th, 2009 Pictures of rally and commentary

Malagasy?

Why "Malagasy" in the page title, and not "Madagascar"? --Ezeu (talk) 22:52, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Why not? --➨♀♂Candlewicke ST # :) 20:29, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Isn't the country known as Madagascar? Wouldn't more people recognise "Madagascar" rather than the near obscure term "Malagasy"? Don't all the references listed in this article refer to Madagascar or Madagascan, rather than Malagasy? --Ezeu (talk) 23:15, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
I heard the BBC use "Malagasy" earlier today. Here's an online mention. See also Malagasy on Wikipedia itself. I wouldn't think it "near obscure" at all. Madagascar doesn't get much of a mention on the international stage so perhaps you are confusing obscurity with the unknown. --Candlewicke ST # :) 20:41, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Ι agree that the current title (Malagasy) fits best. Furthermore, the language of the country is malagasy. --Lemur12 (talk) 03:33, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Malagasy is the demonym for the things from Madagascar. The term is only as obscure as Madagscar itself. That said, a redirect from 2009 Madagascar political crisis is in order, as it is a likely search term.--Cerejota (talk) 11:59, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Time to rename?

News reports indicate that the army/opposition have seized the presidential palace and Ravalomanana has fled. Time to rename this as 2009 Malagasy coup? Jpatokal (talk) 12:07, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd be in favor of creating a whole new article for that. While the protests obviously had quite a bit to do with the coup, they are separate events and independently notable.--TM 13:19, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
I don't see any need to create a new article. The event is still ongoing and there simply isn't enough information to make any more than a stub. The "coup" and the protests are linked, enough, for it to still be reasonable to mention the events here for now ToxicOranges (talk) 19:15, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

FYI, it should be 2009 Malagasy coup d'état, if it is indeed a coup. One could argue that the military did not really faciliate the process, only run with it, and it didn't take over power... but that's not for me to decide, anyway. —Nightstallion 23:57, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

"Coup" is POV terminology. Retitle the article as "2009 Malagasy political crisis". Everyking (talk) 05:48, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

No, a Coup d'état is "the sudden unconstitutional overthrow of a government", and there are plenty of reliable sources calling Madagascar's events just that. The only debatable bit of that is "sudden", which is why eg. Reuters calls it a "slow-motion coup". Jpatokal (talk) 10:28, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Well, it was an unplanned change (I.E. outside of the constitutional process), so I think it qualifies.--TM 12:24, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
One side on this issue—the winning side, as it happens—denies that it is a coup. NPOV requires that we not endorse a viewpoint rejected by one side. Everyking (talk) 15:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

There—I moved the article, and also updated the intro, which was completely out of date. I think this is a no-brainer: since it has resulted in military involvement and a change of government, it's obviously more than just "protests", but at the same time the use of the word "coup" would endorse the pro-Ravalomanana POV, so "political crisis" seems perfectly reasonable. Everyking (talk) 15:30, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

coup?

I say we wait for the RS to develop a line, but from what I am seeing, I think we might have to WP:SUMMARY the coup/transfer of power part into a new article, because while a direct consequence of the political crisis and protests, it is hard to tell if a transfer of power was the intention of the protests or if it was an unintended result.--Cerejota (talk) 12:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

my pov is that it was coup. few tousands protesters can not show opinion of whole 20 milion population and that was not main reason for resignation of ravalomanana. main reason was military mutiny. also international reaction shows that. ..Dubhe.sk (talk) 13:31, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Clearly the protests were aimed at forcing Ravalomanana's resignation and making Rajoelina president, and it was the protests that resulted in military intervention...the sequence of events that began in late January logically concluded in mid-March. If the article is too long, there would be an argument for splitting it, but in terms of the events, they are clearly all closely related as part of a "political crisis". Everyking (talk) 18:37, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
political crisis that led to coup. the result is important. it is a crisis but now it is also coup as it was in mauritania and guinea. if you want to wait for suspension of madagascar from AU, so wait. i think it's clear coup and that way we should also call it.. ..Dubhe.sk (talk) 19:34, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Article is over 40k in length, which, according to Wikipedia:Article size can be split. However, everyday new events seem to be breaking, so splitting it now is probably a good idea.--TM 19:40, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
AU said it clear - it's coup so that way it should be also named.. i see it as one event and for that reason in my opinion it should all stay in one article. also i'm not sure how to divide it but if somebody finds the right breaking point i will have no objection. ..Dubhe.sk (talk) 13:24, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Dubhe moved the article to "2009 Malagasy coup d'etat", and I moved it back to "2009 Malagasy political crisis". In this instance, "coup" is a politically loaded term and its use is a means of defining the events according to one side's POV. Everyking (talk) 20:24, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

using this definition no article could have 'coup' in its name. it's not opinion. did army seize the power? that's only question that should be answered. also EU, AU and SADS named it coup.. ..Dubhe.sk (talk) 20:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
"Coup" can be used in the title of an article about an event when that event can be unambigiously and uncontroversially defined as a coup. In Mauritania last year, for example, there was clearly a coup: the military seized power, detained the president, and set up a military junta. In this case, the events fall in a gray area between a successful "people's power" movement to force a government's resignation and a coup. Obviously, people sympathetic to Rajoelina would tend to characterize it as the former and people sympathetic to Ravalomanana would tend to characterize it as the latter. What actually happened is that popular protests created a climate of severe disorder, leading the military to facilitate the transfer of power to Rajoelina in order to resolve the situation. Ravalomanana resigned because his situation had become untenable, but he was not ousted in the way typically associated with a coup; he transferred power to the military, and the military promptly transferred power to Rajoelina. Was Ravalomanana's act of transferring power to the military in fact a coup? Everyking (talk) 20:48, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
would rajoelina became a president without help of army? that's my question to your question ;-) ..i argue that not the view of ravalomana's or rajoelina's supporters is important. important is view of independent sides such as EU, USA, AU and SADC; and they called it coup. i don't want to fight so you can leave it. but i hate hiding behind pretend "neutrality" because you can "harm" somebody. i like to call things their right name. and if rajoelina wanted to show his support from the people who could agree to referendum suggested by ravalomanana. for me that's clear evidence that he is leaning on the army not on the crowd. ..Dubhe.sk (talk) 21:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
There's another event. One of the presedential palaces was taken over by the military. Did the military know in advance that Ravalomanana was not in the palace? If yes, it might have just been an action to force Ravalomana to resign. (But no guarantee that it was not a coup, since it may also be seen as part of the process to depose Ravalomanana, c.f. the definition of a coup.) If no, it might have been a coup attempt. Qrfqr (talk) 22:17, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
They would certainly have known he was not there. He was at Iavoloha Palace, and everyone knew that. Everyking (talk) 06:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Capital

Why is "Political Crisis" capitalised? --Candlewicke ST # :) 21:44, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Cancellation of a sports game

Under the header "effects", this Wikipedia article lists the cancellation of a sports game. Certainly there are more important and notable effects than this. Regardless, it is my opinion that the cancellation of the game is too trivial to mention. I suggest deleting it from the article. Thoughts? ~ Quacks Like a Duck (talk) 15:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I added it when this was just a little stub. I still think it is relevant, as it was an international game. If a coup was launched in France and a UEFA Champions League game were canceled, most would consider it notable. This game was an equivalent of such a match.--TM 19:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Notable, leave it in. Everyking (talk) 20:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
OK. It will remain. Thanks for the comments. ~ Quacks Like a Duck (talk) 21:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

list of nations that appeared at the inauguration

i was looking to see if there was one, since wiki often has a load of international lists on formality's. I am curious, perhaps it's an idea to provide maximal objectivity and insight in the political backgrounds that way. in the other comments sarkozy is somewhat telling (the eu dares to be a bit moderate), but the other side of the story: who has the courage to welcome a new leader of a poor nation, is ill shown. it would also show wich establishments are still the more fixed internationally at this point in time.24.132.170.97 (talk) 00:03, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

A CBC News article (link) said that no foreign diplomats were in attendance, citing African radio stations at the inauguration. ~ Quacks Like a Duck (talk) 15:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
A Reuters article (link) said that, at least according to the foreign minister, no foreign diplomats were invited to the inauguration. ~ Quacks Like a Duck (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 17:55, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 17:56, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 17:56, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 17:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2009_Malagasy_political_crisis/Archives/2011/December&oldid=466976730"