Jump to content

Talk:Flag of Western Sahara

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

Edit warring by Reisio

[edit]

Reiso, you appear to be pushing to redirect this to Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, despite the lack of consensus for such a notion shown above. Looking over the edit history of this page, this appears to be the typical back-and-forth since its creation. I'm opening a DR thread to get the matter concluded. Nightw 06:56, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Night w. I hope you remember that the lack of consensus above was for doing anything to this page at all, which was at the time a redirect to flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. What is happening here is you are defying the preceding RfC, and I am attempting to preserve the page as it was when it was closed (and also per Wikipedia policy, etc.). ¦ Reisio (talk) 07:13, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I assume you already realize that, after all why would you start proclaiming such boldfaced falsehoods that are so easily disproved if you cared about the truth? ¦ Reisio (talk) 07:18, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Active Dispute Resolution

[edit]

Note to editors, there is currently an active dispute resolution discussion on this article. Thank you. NickCT (talk) 18:04, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RfC draft

[edit]

Hello everyone, this is to let you know that I've closed the DRN thread, and I've started a draft of an RfC on what this page should be over at User:Mr. Stradivarius/Flag of Western Sahara RfC. The RfC format was heavily influenced by User:Qwyrxian's RfC over at Senkaku Islands. Feel free to change the draft as much as you want, although please keep it neutral, and obviously don't actually reply to it yet. I plan to put it up live on this talk page on Dec 20th, which gives us one week to make it as good as we can. Best regards — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 11:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mr. Stradivarius ♫ - Thanks for all your work on this. I made a few quick adjustments. The two major ones were 1) I added a third proposal which was suggested by a number of folks at the DR noticeboard (i.e. deleting Flag of Western Sahara all together. 2) I changed the manner in which we ask people to comment (I find the simple Support option 1 method for RfCs is usually the clearest way to demonstrate consensus). Additionally, I reworded, reformatted some stuff.
With those changes, I think we are good to go! NickCT (talk) 13:55, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the updates! It's looking good. Also, thanks for putting the deletion option in there - I remember thinking that I should put it in, so I don't know why I didn't do it in the end. I think at this rate we might not need to wait a whole week before we put the RfC up. Let's wait a few more days and see if anyone objects, and if no-one does I'll put it up live. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 14:14, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Stradivarius. Yes please wait a few days I also want to make some adjustments/suggestions. --Tachfin (talk) 14:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone have any further updates to the RfC draft? I think I will stick with my original plan of putting it up live on the 20th. I want to do a little more tweaking, but it would seem a good idea to do this after others have had a look at it. Three days left! — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 06:56, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I still think we're good to go... NickCT (talk) 13:32, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've made a change. I believe the proposal 2 is not a disambig page but is a more inclusive article that also deals with historical and regional flags. Also, the proposal to redirect to a different page is distinct in my opinion. Also I've suggested to vote in order of preference.
I was hoping to wait for Night w to come back but he doesn't seem to be around. Also not sure if this holiday season is the best timing but anyway I'm OK to go for it now.
One additional question how is this going to be advertised? I can notify all the people that have ever edited this article --Tachfin (talk) 20:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I've made a few more tweaks. I've reinstated the option of moving Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic to Flag of Western Sahara, as it has come up a number of times in previous discussion. I've also removed the instruction to list the options in order of preference, as that makes it seem a bit too much like a vote to me; instead I've left clear instructions for people to include a rationale, and that the result will depend on the strength of the arguments provided. Good point about the advertising - I'll have a think and post back here in a bit. When we've got that sorted out I'll put the RfC up live, most likely this evening. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 06:09, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here are my suggestions for places to advertise the RfC:

I can't think of any other relevant places, but please let me know if there is something I've missed. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 06:26, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comment: Article content

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
I am closing this RfC following a request on WP:AN that an administrator do so. I find that there is consensus for proposal 3 (i.e., a page explaining and linking to the various flags used to represent the territory, similar to Flag of Korea). This proposal has by far the most support of all, and is supported by a substantial majority of contributors.  Sandstein  09:53, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a long-held dispute about the contents of the pages Flag of Western Sahara and Coat of arms of Western Sahara. This has origins in the real-world territorial dispute over the region of Western Sahara. The territory, listed since the 1970's in the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories, which is currently mostly controlled by Morocco, has been subject to a long standing independence movement, the Polisario Front. That movement, whose leaders are exiled in Algeria, claims the territory is the independent Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.

In the dispute over the Flag of Western Sahara article, there are several proposals for what content the article should contain:

1) The page should redirect to the article: Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (i.e. this flag which is also the Polisario Front flag)
2) The Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic article should be moved to Flag of Western Sahara itself.
3) The page should be an article detailing all the flags used to represent Western Sahara with the relevant information (i.e. Flag of Morocco, Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Regional flags of Western Sahara, Historical flags used in Western Sahara). See Flag of Korea for a slightly crude example.
4) Redirect the page to an article or section that outlines the real-world dispute (such as Politics of Western Sahara, Legal status of Western Sahara, or Foreign relations of Western Sahara).
5) Simply delete Flag of Western Sahara and create a subsection on Western Sahara explaining that there is no officially recognized flag, but displaying both the Moroccan flag and the Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic as flags used to represent the region.

Please let us know which of these proposals you support, along with your rationale. If you think that more than one proposal is acceptable, please consider listing them in order of preference. This may be helpful to the closing editor in judging the consensus for each one. You may choose to use the following format:

Coat of arms of Western Sahara is in a very similar situation, so we should be able to generalize any conclusions drawn from this discussion to that page as well.

There has been a substantial amount of discussion on this dispute already. As well as discussion on the talk page, there was an RfC in May 2011, which ended with no consensus. There was also a DRN thread about the issue in November/December 2011.

Standard RfC disclaimer: This RfC isn't a vote, but rather a discussion among Wikipedia editors to try and find consensus. Coherent arguments based on Wikipedia policies and guidelines will be given more weight than comments simply supporting one proposal or another. As always, remember to keep discussion civil.

— Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 14:18, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Policies and guidelines

[edit]

Comments from involved editors

[edit]
  • Alternative proposal, remix of 1 The main article should be at Flag of Western Sahara and be about this particular flag. As implicitly pointed out above, it's also the flag of the Polisario and the state the SADR, but it was intended to represent the region. No other flag ever has been for Western Sahara, so there's nothing else to discuss in this article. WP:COMMON applies here as well--it's far more likely to see this flag named the "flag of Western Sahara" rather than the "flag of the Polsario Front" or the "flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic." Note that this is not an issue with any other flag article of which I'm aware. Can anyone else find an example like this? Honestly, why is it we have this discussion here with Moroccan editors and there is no problem with (e.g.) Flag of Northern Cyprus or Flag of Kosovo or Flag of Tibet, etc. It seems like there is always so much special pleading with Western Sahara in particular. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:07, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The preceding copied and pasted from a user talk page. Since I posted the above comment, it has become option 2. Thanks to the Stradivarius for alerting me.

I moved your comments b/c this RfC isn't yet live. Obviously the situation w/ Northern Cyprus, Kosovo and Tibet are fundamentally different from Western Sahara, so that point is moot. NickCT (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What? How are they fundamentally different in a way that's germane to this discussion? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 09:32, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's fundamentally different since the Polisario doesn't claim a state that's called "Republic of Western Sahara" but "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic". Obviously if the former was the case we wouldn't be having this discussion. P.S: Please leave the ethnic background or nationality of editors out of this, it's irrelevant to the discussion. We're discussing content not editors. --Tachfin (talk) 11:29, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Northern Cyprus has some level of defacto autonomy from Cyprus. Western Sahara is basically under the control of Morocco.
Kosovo is defacto independent and largely recognized as such in the international community. Not so in Western Sahara.
I believe China actually recognizes the the Flag of Tibet as being the flag of Tibet. Morocco obviously doesn't recognize the SADR flag.
Your Northern Cyprus example was probably the best, and frankly I think one might consider extending this debate to the Flag of Northern Cyprus article. Still, it strikes me that Northern Cyprus is far more of a "tangible entity" than Western Sahara. The flag of Northern Cyprus flies freely over Northern Cyprus. Where does the SADR flag fly?
And re "Please leave the ethnic background or nationality of editors out of this" - Agree wholeheartedly. Focus on the argument please, not the editor NickCT (talk) 13:53, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Right I fail to see how any of those conditions creates a meaningful difference. The flag is flown in the Free Zone of Western Sahara, but even if it wasn't flown anywhere on Earth, it would still be the flag of Western Sahara. The political facts on the ground about Moroccan occupation are irrelevant to this. And while Northern Cyprus has de facto autonomy from Cyprus, it doesn't from Turkey. The SADR has been recognized by more states than Kosovo. Your points are irrelevant here and self-contradictory. Regarding the other users' ethnicities, my point is not that Moroccans as a people somehow have an illegitimate perspective in this--let me revise this to say something like "Kingdom of Morocco sympathizers." No ethnic prejudice was intended by my statement, but a gripe about purely political values. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:05, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Proposal 3 & 5 - Prefer 3, but 5 will work. I've commented extensively on this subject previously. If folks are interested in my justification, they can go through the talk page history. NickCT (talk) 17:27, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I support any as long as it will be clearly stated that the flag the SADR uses has long been known by name as "flag of Western Sahara" (which is indisputable). Per Wikipedia policy we should go with #2, which is how it was originally, but accurate information at a badly named page is almost as good as accurate information at a properly named one (content is king). We have several articles that suffer this situation already, what's one more. ¦ Reisio (talk) 00:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support proposals 1 or 2. I first learned of this this dispute through the recent thread at the dispute resolution noticeboard, and as I gave my opinion on the matter there (and therefore became involved) I thought I may as well repeat it here. I think it is important here to remember that WP:NPOV is applied mostly to article content, rather than article naming or the naming of redirects. I quote from WP:NPOV#Naming: "If a name is widely used in reliable sources (particularly those written in English), and is therefore likely to be well recognized by readers, it may be used even though some may regard it as biased." WP:RNEUTRAL clarifies that this principle also holds for redirects. I think this points toward WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and WP:COMMONNAME as being the main guides for our decision here.

    When we are trying to determine the primary topic, the question we should ask ourselves is this: when a user types in "Flag of Western Sahara" into the Wikipedia search bar, what are they expecting to be taken to? WP:PRIMARYTOPIC says that there is no established rule for determining this, but I think that perhaps the simplest and most immediate demonstration is a Google Image search for '"Western Sahara" flag'. This returns very little other than the SADR flag, and looks to me to be very good evidence that we should treat this flag as being the primary topic for this term.

    Determining if the common name of the flag is "Flag of Western Sahara" is a little more difficult. Google searches show a similar number of hits for both "Flag of Western Sahara" and "Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic", and I have seen both terms mentioned in print sources. Unfortunately, very few books of flags are viewable online, and these are the sources that we most need to survey before making a decision on this. Until we have this information, I would go with "Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic" for neutrality reasons.

    Please note that I am not suggesting that we ignore WP:NPOV when making this decision - I merely think that neutrality is more relevant to the content of the article than to the naming. Whatever the name ends up being, I think the article about the SADR flag should a) include a hatnote linking to the relevant articles, b) include other alternative names, and c) describe the disputed nature of the flag. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 19:10, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support 3. I'd prefer 5, but I guess it's a valid search. There are many flags used in Western Sahara, none represent the entity designated Western Sahara and none are intended to, as it's a purely neutral term. I support common name in theory, but we shouldn't foster ignorance. An article on flags and nationalistic symbols used there would be a quality contribution to the project regardless of this dispute. Nightw 03:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What? "There are many flags used in Western Sahara, none represent the entity designated Western Sahara and none are intended to" That's patently untrue--what makes you think either of those things? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:14, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Western Sahara" is a politically neutral term. There are flags used to represent the Southern Provinces and the SADR, but flags don't represent the names of geographic regions, especially not those intended to be apolitical. Are you honestly claiming that the flag of Morocco isn't "used in Western Sahara", and that those of its Boujdour, Smara and Laayoune provinces weren't "used in Western Sahara" before? Nightw 06:50, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite Simply put, you don't know what you're talking about—this flag is not used to represent the Southern Provinces (which extend past the borders of Western Sahara) and it was created before the establishment of the SADR. Neither of your claims is accurate. And I really have no idea where you get this notion that "flags don't represent the names of geographic regions" as they clearly do. Of course I am not claiming that the flag of Morocco isn't used in Western Sahara, but how is that relevant? The flag of the United Nations is used there, too. I live in Indianapolis, all kinds of flags are used here, but only one represents Indianapolis. I'm still not sure what your point is. For that matter, when you ask if the flags of Boujdour, Smara, and Laayoune provinces weren't used in Western Sahara "before", I have no idea what you mean... Before what? This post is virtually unintelligible. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:51, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to map it out for you if that's what you're wanting... ? You argued that both of my claims were "patently untrue" and asked me how I came to such conclusions. The first part of my response was about my second claim: flags representing Western Sahara. The second part is about my first claim: flags being used in Western Sahara; I was under the impression that you were disputing this when you said "either of those things". To elaborate on the first one, "Western Sahara" is a disputed territory; the name was created in 1975 by the United Nations and is a purely apolitical designation. You can't attach flags to something intended to be independent of political allegiances—Wikipedia:Western Sahara Infobox/Vote would seem to demonstrate a fairly landslide consensus for this.
From what I can tell, you've now said that "There are flags used to represent the Southern Provinces and the SADR" is "inaccurate", is that correct? Well there are—one you can read about at Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic and the others are the flags for the three provinces I mentioned. However, I think these are no longer used (which is what I meant by "before", by the way). Please clarify: which flag are you referring to when you say "this flag is not used to represent the Southern Provinces"; if it's the Moroccan flag (which is the I meant), why is it not? Nightw 17:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from uninvolved editors

[edit]
  • I would support options 3, 4 or 5; the main differentiator being size (if we develop lots more content on the two flags or the two coats of arms, put them in a separate article; if not then cover them both in an existing article). I believe that favouring one side or the other would be inappropriate since both sides have reasonable claims to be flying the "real" flag. An article with a neutral-looking title which implied to readers that it was showing the "real" flag of Western Sahara, but only actually showed one, would be inappropriate. bobrayner (talk) 15:28, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that the flag of Morocco is the flag of Morocco. However, the Moroccan - and de facto - position is that Western Sahara is an integral part of Morocco. The Sahrawi side disagrees with this, of course, and we should give due weight to that side too. When I last travelled through Western Sahara it was on a Moroccan visa, dealing with Moroccan officials, spending MAD - and Moroccan flags were flown. To write an article about the "flag of western sahara" whilst intentionally omitting or sidelining the flag that is actually flown over western sahara would be incompatible with WP:NPOV. Somewhere around here I still have customs documents (with a little Moroccan coat of arms IIRC) showing that I exported my vehicle from Morocco to Mauritania; some might argue that Morocco has no such border crossing with Mauritania, but the facts on the ground are different, and this encyclopaedia must take account of those facts. bobrayner (talk) 16:58, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Right They do, but that's not mutually exclusive of it being occupied. If you want citations from the UN's web site of the General Assembly voting to urge Morocco to end the occupation, I can provide them. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah. I'd be interested to see those. The resolutions I'm familiar with call for self-determination for Western Saharans, which of course is different than saying Western Sahara is occupied. NickCT (talk) 15:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here you go:
UN General Assembly Resolution 34/37 - November 21, 1979, vote: 85-6, with 41 abstentions reads in part:
"the aggravation of the situation resulting from the continued occupation by Morocco and the extension of that occupation to the territory recently evacuated by Mauritania"
Link to that session of the GA
Direct link to the pdf
UN General Assembly Resolution 35/19 - November 11, 1980, vote: 88-8, with 43 absentions reads in part:
"terminate the occupation of the territory of Western Sahara"
Link to that session of the GA
Direct link to the pdf
Two citations. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 10:16, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • If Morocco imposes its own flag on Western Sahara, how is that irrelevant? We simply cannot have a neutral article on "Flag of Western Sahara" whilst omitting or sidelining the flag which actually flies over Western Sahara. Perhaps the Sahrawi cause is worthy or righteous; but that alone should not be the basis of content decisions. (Taking your soviet example: Democracy is a worthy cause, and we surely sympathise with people pushing for democracy in Belarus, but that doesn't mean that we must pretend that Belarus is now free and democratic. The facts on the ground, alas, are different.) bobrayner (talk) 19:18, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Relevant It's worth mentioning, but this is still the only flag of Western Sahara. The flag of Morocco is not the flag of Western Sahara, nor is it intended as such, anymore than it's the flag of the SADR or Polisario. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1 or if a clear subject can be established, 3. No-one would call the Moroccan flag the flag of Western Sahara, it's the flag of Morocco (with or without WS). However, that's assuming the reader knew of the flag they were looking for. I suppose if a reader didn't know about any situation, but for some reason saw WS on a map and wondered what its flag was (maybe they saw a flag map?), 3 could be better. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 21:17, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • 2 or 1, possibly 3 (but I'd prefer 1/2). As has been said, the flag of Morocco is the flag of Morocco and not of Western Sahara. If Morocco had regional flags for its Western Sahara-based divisions, that would be another matter, though. —Nightstallion 10:09, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Morocco does have flags and Heraldry for its Western Sahara-based divisions: (Dakhla) (Laayoun). See Commons for more --Tachfin (talk) 10:48, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt that they're widely used as subnational flags, but they're certainly worth a mention towards the end of an article if we can get some good sourcing... bobrayner (talk) 11:14, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well if you have Flag of Texas in mind, it's certainly not widely used. But they exist and are meant to represent the region and that's what matters.--Tachfin (talk) 12:03, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do they have a flag for the whole Western Sahara? Chipmunkdavis (talk) 12:54, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's actually a really interesting/pertinent question. I tried to research this a little while ago, and as far as I could tell, the answer was no. NickCT (talk) 13:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If the Moroccan government wants to reinforce the message that WS is an integral part of Morocco, it's easy to see why they wouldn't want to create their own flag specifically for Western Sahara. Individual provinces, yes, which would fit the Moroccan message; but not for WS as a whole, which would be covered by the Moroccan flag. bobrayner (talk) 14:22, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • 2 or 3, there is a place called Western Sahara, it has a flag. Like there is an Iroquois passport. You could argue that it isn't a passport, but really it's not much of an argument. If you don't believe in the passport, then it isn't, if you do, then it is. It's notable and verifiable so there you are, article. Addendum to 3: I don't see a point in mentioning the Moroccan flag because it isn't the flag of Western Sahara, like the flag of the United Kingdom is not the flag of Wales. Also relevant: Flag of Kurdistan — having an article Flag of Kurdistan with Turkish, Iraqi, Iranian and Syrian national flags on it would be pretty weird. - Francis Tyers · 11:35, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1 - There is only one flag commonly referred to as the "Flag of Western Sahara", and that's the flag of SADR. Just because SADR's independence is disputed, doesn't change this fact. I'd happily support option 3 if RS could be found describing another flag as a "Flag of Western Sahara" (historical, Moroccan flag for the region, etc.) but as of yet no such sources have been produced. The flag of Morocco is no more a "flag of Western Sahara" than the Flag of the USA is a Flag of Texas, the Flag of the EU is a Flag of Belgium, or the Flag of France is a Flag of Paris. TDL (talk) 17:35, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • If what is currently known as the Flag of Texas were used solely by a Texan separatist movement, that had little international recognition, and little de facto control in Texas, then, yes, it probably would wouldn't be appropriate to display it in an unqualified manner at Flag of Texas. While the commonly referred to argument has some merit, there are some more important policies here (i.e. WP:V,WP:N). NickCT (talk) 06:49, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Right, but no one is suggesting that it should be displayed in an unqualified manner. Of course, as others above have mentioned above, the disputed nature of the SADR should be discussed at the page.
And I agree that WP:V is an important policy. However, since you've yet to find any WP:RS to WP:VERIFY your claim that there are other flags called the "flag of western sahara", this policy also supports the redirect. Calling the Moroccan Flag a "Flag of Western Sahara", without sources to verify this claim, is WP:OR. TDL (talk) 23:25, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've yet to see sources that verify the SADR flag is the "Flag of Western Sahara". NickCT (talk) 03:31, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You haven't? Based on your comments above, I was under the impression that you had accepted the fact that "flag of western sahara" is commonly used to refer to the SADR flag. Here are some examples from RS of such usage for you benefit: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. TDL (talk) 04:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Well I see three potentially mainstream sources there. The Gaurdian, MSNBC and the flag book. The Guardian basically calls out that what is called "the flag of Saraha" is not officially the flag of Sahara. The MSNBC article admittedly does call it the "flag of Western Sahara" without qualification. The Flag Book calls out that WS isn't an independent country, and displays the Moroccon flag on the adjacent page (essentially what we're calling for with proposal 3).
That MSNBC calls it the flag of the Western Sahara in an unqualified fashion is likely just the result of journalistic concision. And hey, perhaps you'll be able to find a number of sources that refer the SADR flag as the FoWS in an off-hand manner. That doesn't mean that in a more expansive article about the flag, it is neutral to simply display the SADR flag alone.
Can you find an article from a reliable source dealing directly with the WS independence issue that calls the SADR the FoWS in an unqualified fashion? NickCT (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The guardian source doesn't at all qualify its name, just its official status (which is obviously zero in Moroccan areas). It also mentions the dispute over the territory. I'm sure any decent article we have will do the same, no matter what the title or the contents. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 17:13, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "..is not officially the flag of Sahara" - Who said it was official? Of course the flag isn't recognized by Morocco, and as mentioned above I fully support adding text to Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic describing Morocco's position on SADR and their flag. Lot's of unofficial flags have articles (Ulster Banner) since they're still notable.
  • "WS isn't an independent country" - What's the relevance of this? Lot's of non-independent countries have flags (Scotland, Quebec, Texas).
  • "displays the Moroccon flag on the adjacent page (essentially what we're calling for with proposal 3)" - No, the flag book has completely distinct and equivalent entries for Morocco and Western Sahara, which is what option #1 calls for.
  • "..result of journalistic concision" - Precisely. "Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic" is very long so it's commonly called Flag of Western Sahara. The two terms are used interchangeably, hence the need for a redirect.
  • "Can you find an article from a reliable source dealing directly with the WS independence issue that calls the SADR the FoWS in an unqualified fashion" - Again, you aren't reading my responses. That's not what option 1 proposes. I fully support adding text to Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic to qualify the disputed nature of SADR.
  • Care to explain why Radio Netherlands Worldwide, afrol and Human Rights Watch are not mainstream? And you still have yet to produce a single source which describes any other flag as the "flag of Western Sahara". TDL (talk) 18:15, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Who said it was official?" - A redirect suggests, or at least implies such.
"Scotland, Quebec, Texas" - All examples of recognized entities.
" distinct and equivalent entries for Morocco and Western Sahara" - I think that's an interpretation. I'm guessing they put the entries next to each other for a reason.
"The two terms are used interchangeably, " - Right. Used interchangeably when you aren't providing detailed information about the political situation. Here we are.
"I fully support adding text to Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic to qualify the disputed nature of SADR." - Not enough. Still implies that the SADR is an official and/or recognized flag of WS, which it isn't.
"Radio Netherlands Worldwide, afrol and Human Rights Watch are not mainstream" - Mainly b/c I don't trust dutch people. But seriously, I don't think I need to explain why MSNBC and theGuardian are more mainstream/reliable than those other sources.
"you still have yet to produce a single source which describes any other flag as the "flag of Western Sahara" - I can provide you with a couple hundred sources that provide "flags of the world" and omit a flag for Western Sahara. Why would they do that? Perhaps b/c there is no "Flag of Western Sahara". NickCT (talk) 22:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to the book, I don't see any connection whatsoever between their Morocco and WS entries. They're grouped near each other because they're geographically near each other. Neither entry mentions the other.
Many of the sources given did in fact describe the political situation, concisely and accurately, yet still used the term.
Just because a flag is absent does not mean it doesn't exists. This position ignores the many sources out there that do use the term, and is also can be very easily explained, with myself placing a good bet that many flags of the world compilations simply avoid any disputed countries. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 22:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok guys. Well again, I think we're at impasse. There seem to be two main arguments here. One is the common name argument, which I've conceded is a valid reason to support positions 1 or 2. The second is a simple WP:NPOV/WP:V argument.
I maintain that calling an article "Flag of X" has an implication that the flag you're showing the user is a real and at least somewhat recognized flag of a real and somewhat recognized place. This simply isn't true of "Flag of Western Sahara".
@Chipmunkdavis - many flags of the world compilations simply avoid any disputed countries. - True. But I've found a lot of sources which go as far to show the Flag of Palestine as a national flag, yet still exclude FoWS. I can find a "Flag of X" article of WP which would have as few mentions on "list of world flags" sources as FoWS would. NickCT (talk) 03:41, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • 3 or 5. Leaning towards 3, since this would be in keeping with other articles about flags. 4 could also work on the basis that it is a variation on 5, I guess. 1 and 2 seem to go against NPOV and against WP's general mission to inform, because they fail to let the reader know that there is an political controversy at play.— Preceding unsigned comment added by FormerIP (talk • contribs) 16:38, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't agree that options 1 and 2 necessarily fail to inform readers about the controversy over the territory. There is nothing to stop there from being a hatnote pointing to the Moroccan flag, there being a section about the territory dispute, and information about the controversy being displayed prominently in the lede. Indeed, I think that any half-decent article about the flag in question would do exactly that, and I volunteer to write the section myself if the outcome of this RfC is option 1 or option 2. Actually, no, I think I'll add all those things into the article tomorrow when I have a bit of time. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 17:29, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, I've rewritten Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. Have a look at the before and after versions to see the difference. It could still probably use some tweaking and some more references, but I think it is looking a lot better than it was before. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 13:32, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Not sure if that much detail on the political situation is needed, but not a bad change at all. If the flag is banned in Morocco (including parts of WS it controls of course) then that should be added. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 13:50, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • 3 - Most encyclopedic approach, and best for preventing this debate from re-happening again in the future. Options 1 and 2 take sides. Options 4 and 5 punt, and will just cause confusion for readers, and cause the debate to erupt again in a couple of years. Just capture both sides of the debate in a single article ... that is 3. --Noleander (talk) 20:51, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Threaded discussion

[edit]

Note - this thread is about Francis Tyers's comment above. I have moved it from the "Comments from uninvolved editors" section. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 03:56, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'there is a place called Western Sahara, it has a flag' The Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic has a flag. Western Sahara -a disputed territory- doesn't, but there are flags meant to represent it.
'like the flag of the United Kingdom is not the flag of Wales' Similarly one can say that the Flag of the United Kingdom is the official flag of Northern Ireland. --Tachfin (talk) 12:03, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone says the UK flag is the flag of Northern Ireland. An official flag in Northern Ireland maybe, but it is in the rest of the UK as well. It is used in Northern Ireland simply as a default as they don't have their own flag. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 12:54, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note Chimpmunk that at Flag of Northern Ireland, all flags used to represent Northern Ireland appear (including the Irish tricoulor). If that's the standard you want to support, I'd go with proposal 3 and not 1. 1 is essentially arguing that the Irish tricoulor should be moved to Flag of Northern Ireland. NickCT (talk) 13:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see that analogy at all. The Irish tricolour is rarely argued to be the flag of Northern Ireland. It's often explicitly used as a symbol that there shouldn't be a Northern Ireland, but just an Ireland. The Polsario flag on the other hand is often associated with the Western Sahara. The Flag of Northern Ireland page was the reason for my caveat to pick 3, although I'd still expect a hatnote. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 14:09, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I like the example of Flag of Northern Ireland. With Western Sahara, we would probably want to give different order or weight to the respective flags, but I like the general approach used for the NI article. If we have any historical information, that could be a nice addition too. bobrayner (talk) 14:17, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Chip, The Ulster Banner, Flag of Ulster and the Union Flag are all used to represent Northern Ireland depending on POV. 'The Polsario flag on the other hand is often associated with the Western Sahara' That depends on POV; we can as well say that the flag of Morocco is often associated with Western Sahara. Neutral sources however, consider the territory disputed and thus never associate it with a flag. It all boils down to semantics, if one doesn't recognize either party claim to the territory then, the flag of the 'Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic' is the flag of the 'Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic' just as the flag of Morocco is the flag of Morocco. If one wants to associate SADR and WS because of territorial claims or one's perception/POV then why not just redirect Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic to Western Sahara or vice-versa. Why not just redirect anything "X of Western Sahara" to "X of Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic"? I can't see how it can be any different using the territorial logic. P.S: Option 3 comes with a hatnote to "Flag of SADR" that was the original proposal in the DR noticeboard, we just forgot to add that precision --Tachfin (talk) 14:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Chip - "The Irish tricolour is rarely argued to be the flag of Northern Ireland." - Maybe not the flag of Northern Ireland, but a certain contigent would argue that the tricolour is the flag that should represent/be flown over the region, right? Similarly, in WS, the Moroccan flag flies.... NickCT (talk) 15:00, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Tachfin, "The Polsario flag on the other hand is often associated with the Western Sahara" is not based on POV, it's true. Whether it should or shouldn't be is POV. My comment wasn't about what we say or don't say, but about what is said in English. Northern Ireland is a far more known situation, no doubt because as part of the UK it receives a lot of attention in English media. Due to the (correct or incorrect) representation of the Polsario flag as the flag of WS in English, it's quite conceivable that a user looking for information on the Polsario flag would search that.
@NickCT, That's true, but since we're discussing a redirect the exact wording is important. It'd be a very different matter discussing actual content. POV redirects are allowed under wikipedia guidelines. Having an article similar to the NI one is possible, but the justification isn't as strong. The NI flag debate is actually about the flag, a debate which exists in real life. The dispute on this page has nothing to do with the flag itself, but is directly about the Morocco-Polsario dispute. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 15:35, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Chipmunkdavis - Re "exact wording is important." - I think it's self evident that when a user types in "Flag of X", they expect to see the flag that represents/flies over X. I'm a little confused by what you mean by "in real life". There are two sides in WS debate who will make different claims as to what the "Flag of Western Sahara" should be. Similarly there are two sides in the NI debate who will make different claims about what the "Flag of NI" is. So, why exactly should the two be treated differently? NickCT (talk) 16:23, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, to clarify, there is actual debate in NI (and elsewhere I suppose) about the specific question of what their flag should be (and there's more than two sides there!). The WS debate isn't specifically about the flags, but rather about the overall sovereignty question. Put another way, there's an actual debate over flags which could be written about. In constrast, there's no debate over WS flags, just the overall Morocco-Polsario debate. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:35, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmmm... I think you're making a particularly nuanced distinction here. The NI flag debate wouldn't exist without the overall Unionist-Republican debate.... They are one in the same. NickCT (talk) 17:14, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps, but at least for me the fact there actually was a flag of Northern Ireland (and that there still is in sporting), which was not simply that of a controlling state, does make it a different situation. I'd compare it to Morocco making a flag for, say, a Western Saharan autonomous region. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 18:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Well I take the point that the SADR flag may be the only flag that is unique to a territory called Western Sahara, but is uniqueness really enough? I mean, if I made a flag and called "Flag of 13 Cherry St., NYC, NY", and it appeared in a news article, would that be enough to warrant an page on Wikipedia even if it wasn't a "real" flag in the common sense? I think part of the problem you're not addressing, is that when a user types in "Flag of Western Sahara" and sees the SADR flag it gives a fairly strong implication that the SADR flag is the "official" and solely recognized flag of Western Sahara. You don't see any WP:NPOV issues there? NickCT (talk) 20:22, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I reckon there'd be an issue for an article, but I don't see a great problem with a POV redirect. If we direct a POV redirect to an article that properly explains the situation in its lead, I think the opportunity for further education there. If we quickly summarise the issue on the Sahrawi flag article, saying something along the lines of "This flag is flown by the Sahrawi republic, which claims the Western Sahara, which is mostly controlled by Morocco", that would explain the redirect and also show that Morocco basically controls the Western Sahara. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 21:28, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Polisario flag is unique to 'Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic' not WS which doesn't have a flag, that's the whole point. If we restrict 'flag of WS' to just a redirect to 'SADR flag' then one cannot add a lot of relevant information (e.g. historical flags used in WS, regional flags, Morocco's flag flown there) which would be totally irrelevant to the SADR article.

@Chipmunkdavis, "Due to the (correct or incorrect) representation of the Polsario flag as the flag of WS in English, " Simply not true, what RS says "flag of WS is this?" None I believe since that flag is called 'flag of SADR', an author -hypothetically- calling it 'flag of WS' would be ridiculous, because that would mean they don't know what SADR is, in which case they shouldn't be writing about the subject to begin with and certainly not quoted here as an authoritative source. Even the people who invented that flag (and use it today), called it flag of Polisario Front then flag of SADR, but never flag of WS. Now it is of course -indirectly- associated with Western Sahara in the same way that the flag of Morocco is -indirectly- associated with WS depending on POV or lack thereof.

@Chipmunkdavis, "it's quite conceivable that a user looking for information on the Polsario flag would search that." That's judging a reader's intention which no one can know and we don't go by that sort of rationale anyway. Examples: Can you tell me what a reader expects to see when they type Tits in the search box? What they expect to see when searching for Flag of Northern Ireland? When searching Flag of Wallis and Futuna? Flag of New Caledonia? That being said, someone wanting info about SADR flag will find it in the option 3 configuration or easily get there with the hatnote. Someone wanting accurate and factual information (historical/regional/real life situation) about the flag of WS will also find it in option 3 article; this info though is irrelevant in an article solely about SADR flag. That's the point of having names for stuff. --Tachfin (talk) 21:35, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not just discussing academic texts, but layman (better term?) english. Wikipedia caters to all readers. We're not discussing who to quote in our article text, but about what something should lead to. It's a navigation problem more than anything else. Simply googling "Flag of Western Sahara" indicates quite strongly, to say the least, that that phrase is commonly associated with the Sahrawi flag. English usage is in fact a rationale we go by a lot for creating redirects (in fact I can't think of any other reason to create a redirect). The Polsario flag is far more directly associated with WS than the Moroccan one, as it is the flag of a state that basically claims to succeed the Spanish Sahara. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 22:22, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"Simply googling "Flag of Western Sahara" indicates quite strongly, to say the least, that that phrase is commonly associated with the Sahrawi flag" Similarly googling 'Tits' or 'Flag of Northern Ireland' also indicates quite strongly, but not a reason to ignore semantics. --Tachfin (talk) 22:42, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Chipmunk - I'm not sure what you mean by a "POV redirect". Are you saying this is what option 2 is? You realize option two would simply have "Flag of Western Sahara" be the article currently at Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. NickCT (talk) 23:34, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Tachfin: When I search "Flag of Northern Ireland" I get a huge variety of hits. Websites often explain the issue and show multiple flags. The second image hit is a Union Jack, and a huge variety of flags are in the images. What do your results indicate?
@NickCT: I'm discussing option 1, sorry. It got mixed in to the conversation. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 23:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
When you say "If we direct a POV redirect to an article", you mean redirect to Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, and not redirect to some article under a different title which explains the conflict, right? Because, proposal 1 would simply redirect FoWS to FoSADR (as FoSADR currently stands). NickCT (talk) 00:31, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 10:03, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Option 1 doesn't necessarily mean keeping Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic as it stands - it could include adding a hatnote and a section explaining the contested nature of the flag, for example. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 11:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Chipmunkdavis - Ok. Well, I don't think we're going to see eye-to-eye here. It suffices to say that I feel a redirect unmitigatably suggests the SADR flag is somehow an "official" flag of Western Sahara (hence violating NPOV). I guess you on the other hand don't feel it's an issue if the article "properly explains the situation in its lead". I think the problem with that position is that when a user types in "Flag of Western Sahara" and sees the SADR flag flag, the initial impression is going to be "This is the flag that represents Western Sahara". The subsequent explanation will likely get missed by many readers, leaving them with a false impression.
@Mr. Stradivarius - I think that would go some way to mitigate things, but I still don't feel it's ideal. Thanks for the suggestion though! NickCT (talk) 13:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Chipmunkdavis, we don't go by google when there is more than one meaning. (c.f Tits example) We know better here, If we were to go by that rationale we'll redirect Western Sahara to SADR. I don't doubt that for a lot of people it's the same thing (e.g. those who have recognized it as a country). Western Sahara # SADR, thus not to be confused. --Tachfin (talk) 13:41, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Tachfin: I simply used google to demonstrate the common connection in English. There isn't two meanings for the term, because as pointed out, the Moroccan flag is seen as the flag of all of Morocco, not really as the flag of individual parts of it. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Chipmunkdavis We've established and we know that WS # SADR therefore not to be used interchangeably, regardless of what comes up to you in Google. Anything beyond that is just unnecessary hand-waving. As to the meaning of "what is the flag of WS?", depends on who you ask (hence the POV issue). If I go by your rationale, I don't see a reason for separating Western Sahara and Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic articles (and the related articles e.g. "X of Western Sahara" etc), let's just redirect them all to one another; by all means there is a "common connection", why bother with anything else? --Tachfin (talk) 17:51, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Common name See WP:COMMON. If we bifurcate those two articles, it's because there is material to warrant it (and add a hatnote.) There will never be enough material for splitting this article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:09, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
NPOV: don't forget that some principles are more important than others, and that the WP:NPOV principle is a fundamental one, a core content policy and is non-negotiable.
Also, I quote WP:COMMONNAME: "Neutrality is also considered ; our policy on neutral titles, and what neutrality in titles is, follows in the next section. When there are several names for a subject, all of them fairly common, and the most common has problems, it is perfectly reasonable to choose one of the others"
Omar-Toons (talk) 17:19, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Neutrality How is this name not neutral? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:42, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your quote from COMMONNAME would be a good argument against 2, but not any of the other options. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also Omar's quote is irrelevant here, as there are not "several names for a subject, all of them fairly common." I have never in my life seen this referred to as the "flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic" outside of Wikipedia. We could invent all kinds of names for it or apply generic labels to it (Flag of the Polisario Front, Sahrawi nationalist flag, Western Sahara independence movement flag), but that would be original research. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:38, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Look, if Steven Colbert launched a "Flag of Swaziland" campaign, in which he created a his own flag with his face on it and got all his followers to reference it as the "Flag of Swaziland", and his campaign was successful to the point that the most common use of the term "flag of Swaziland" was in reference to Colbert's face flag, does that mean WP should change the Flag of Swaziland article to a picture of Colbert's face? NO!!! Of course not. Why? B/c there is a verifiable flag of Swaziland, and it does not include Colbert's face. The common name policy does not trump what is neutral and verifiable. It is neutral and verifiable to say that there is no widely recognized Flag of Western Sahara. WP should reflect that regardless of the common name argument. Simple. NickCT (talk) 03:50, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Right In the case you mentioned, there would be two legitimate things called the "flag of Swaziland", so your example is not relevant. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:14, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well... I guess in our situation there are no legitimate things called "Flag of Western Sahara". Showing the flag of Morocco seems equally valid as the SADR flag. NickCT (talk) 17:52, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone feel like volunteering to go to the library, see how the SADR flag is portrayed in the various books of flags, and then post the results back here? I think that it would be very useful for this discussion to see how these kind of sources treat the SADR flag, but very few books of flags are available online. (An example of the kind of book I mean, and one of the rare ones that is actually online, is this one posted by TDL.) It's pretty difficult to do that kind of thing living in Sapporo as I am, but there still might be a few books in one of the university libraries around here. It's probably much easier for someone living in an English-speaking country though. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 11:47, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A trip to the local library to do actual research!?! What do you think this is? Britanica?...... No, but seriously. I'd be interested to have an answer to this question as well. NickCT (talk) 17:55, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Late support for resolution

[edit]

Received request to participate, but only just noted. Wished to note my support for the resolution chosen. --collounsbury (talk) 11:33, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Better late than never! Thanks for weighing in. NickCT (talk) 15:33, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed resolution

[edit]

It seems absurd to me that this is a disambiguation page, as the phrase "Flag of Western Sahara" is not ambiguous, it is merely controversial. That makes this page a violation of WP:DABCONCEPT, and I therefore propose the following solution.

  1. Create a brief section in the Western Sahara article noting the flags that have flown over this territory and incorporating the two links on this page.
  2. Redirect this title to that section.

Cheers! bd2412 T 16:45, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

After lengthy discussions, the adopted resolution was option 3, which is an article not a disambig. I'll try to write a short article along the lines of Flag of Northern Ireland --Tachfin (talk) 17:07, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree with that route also. Cheers! bd2412 T 17:11, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've re-written the article and tried to be faithful to the original proposal (hatnote, historical regional flags). The Ifni-Sahara colonial ensign is to be added, couldn't find it on commons. --Tachfin (talk) 22:59, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

POV template added...

[edit]

... since SADR's flag is described as "commonly referred to as the 'flag of Western Sahara'", which isn't consensual according to the whole discussion above. --Omar-Toons (talk) 08:23, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't read through the discussion above so I don't know whether there were any suitable sources cited there (or elsewhere) but the statement this flag is commonly referred to as the "flag of Western Sahara" is an unsourced and I assume contentious statement. It therefore cannot remain in the article. I think it has to stay out until a source is provided to support the statement per WP:V. Sean.hoyland - talk 09:09, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Let's see you haven't read, and you're assuming. :p There is no source at sky to suggest it is any color but blue, there is no source at wheel to suggest it is anything other than round. The statement is indisputable, and therefore requires no citation whatsoever (if you want to waste time citing the plainly obvious, though, be my guest). ¦ Reisio (talk) 02:52, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It goes back to the basic terminological premise of the dispute. Under the Moroccan POV, there is no Western Sahara, just more provinces of Morocco. Under the Sahrawi view, there is an independent Western Sahara, with all symbols associated with that. Due to this, the Sahrawi flag is often referred to as the flag of the Western Sahara, because that's the only flag of the Western Sahara under any POV. Just google flag of the western sahara and see what pops up. CMD (talk) 12:29, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sources All that's required are sources which call this "flag of Western Sahara" then (and several do.) —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 16:48, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
More specifically, we would need sources that say it is "commonly referred to" in such a way. Formerip (talk) 17:07, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed it to "sometimes", rather than "commonly". CMD (talk) 19:30, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes? How many times? By whom? For which occasion? Sorry, but basing on this logic the same is true for the Moroccan flag. --Omar-Toons (talk) 02:23, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Right If you have sources that refer to the flag of Morocco as the "flag of Western Sahara" then go for it. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:30, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are asking us to provide a source that confirms that Morocco considers its flag as legitimate in a territory that he considers as his own? Are you kidding? --Omar-Toons (talk) 11:32, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm not You're not understanding. No one calls the flag of the United States the "flag of Texas", just like no one calls the flag of Morocco the "flag of Western Sahara". That flag doesn't represent that political entity. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:52, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
YOU are not understanding that you are talking about a political entity called SADR while the neutral term "Western Sahara" refers to a territorial entity. --Omar-Toons (talk) 02:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's three versus one, Omar, go find some more Moroccans and then we can play again. ¦ Reisio (talk) 02:52, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stop please As I pointed out earlier, you can find sources that say that this image is the "flag of Western Sahara". You cannot find any source that says this image is the "flag of Western Sahara". Agree or disagree? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:55, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, WS is (from the Moroccan viewpoint) simply the southern part of Morocco, and the flag of Morocco is no more the flag of southern Morocco than the Flag of China is the Flag of southern China or the flag of the United States is the flag of Texas. Personally I think the existence of this page is silly, WS is disputed we get it, but the only flag of WS is the SADR one. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 00:28, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was merge. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 22:09, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic be merged into Flag of Western Sahara. There isn't enough content here for two separate articles. Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic can easily be a section of this article, see this draft. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 16:02, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "just completed" lengthy resolution was 12 mouths ago, and consensus can change. Talking about "theory" is one thing, but now that the resolution has been implanted we can see that's there's not enough content for content here for two separate articles, so I say we amened the resolution. The resolution wouldn't be that upended: It said "The page should be an article detailing all the flags used to represent Western Sahara with the relevant information (i.e. Flag of Morocco, Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Regional flags of Western Sahara, Historical flags used in Western Sahara)." and that's what this page will continue to be, but with the addition of a section about the SADR flag.
The "Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic" section won't mention the flag of Morocco just as the current "Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic" article doesn't. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 23:40, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It may have been twelve months ago, but some of us have been dealing with biased editing associated with Western Sahara for seven years. I think, if you should pull it off, that what will happen is the Moroccan POV pushers will renew their efforts to marginalize the information on the “opposing” flag, and will beam at the thought of flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic also being a mere redirect (which can much more easily be simply deleted via the bureaucracy). Meanwhile you’ll no doubt have moved on to other things. :p That said, I won’t oppose you (and haven’t). ¦ Reisio (talk) 01:04, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't plan to take this page off my watchlist. It would be impossible to delete the redirect because as an {{R from merge}} it would be necessary for attribution, and even if it weren't seriously doubt they could ever delete the redirect at long as this article covered the SADR flag. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 03:11, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger=Censorship???

[edit]

Where's all the information contained in former article Flag of the SADR?. One thing is merge two articles, another different thing is deleting sourced info from one of the articles taking advantage of the merger. Thats simply C-E-N-S-O-R-S-H-I-P. I will add all the deleted content and several more, of course. --HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:21, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No censorship intended, did I miss something when I merged the articles? Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 17:42, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, you mean the construction sheets. They weren't in the other article during the merge. I'm not the one who removed them, that was SiBr4. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 08:59, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Official flag

[edit]

Im still waiting for some type of evidence that the current 1:2 version of the SADR flag is the official one, as no proof is given. So I would told other users that instead deleting sourced content, they would be much credible if they search for evidences that back their allegations.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:59, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So you want to keep these construction sheets in the article and label them as "official" just because there's no proof that it's not official? I agree that sources need to be found if the flag should be 1:2 or 2:3, but currently there aren't any official sources that support either version (Ciudad Futura is not an official source, see this talk page). I think that until there are, the displayed flag should be the one mostly used, and almost all images found on the Internet use the 1:2 version rather than CF's 2:3 flag. SiBr4 (talk) 18:50, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP is an encyclopedia, not a popularity competition. Both flags should be included or neither should be included, otherwise is simply POV.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 16:53, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But at least it should say that the official ratio is unclear. Right now, the infobox shows one version of the flag saying the ratio is 1:2; but in the article, construction sheets from some random website, labeled "Official graphical representation", show a different flag. SiBr4 (talk) 17:25, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

UNMERGING ARTICLES

[edit]

Hello,

Since WE, contributors, spent more than a month discussing the issue related to this article, it is highly appalling tha Emette decided, after less than a week discussion where only 3 people were involved and where contributors to this articles have not been warned, to make a non-consensual change.

The Dec. 2011-Jan. 2012 discussion is based on the WP:NPOV policy, and the previous consensus decided which formulation matched this WP core policy, and I don't see a simple discussion between 3 people reverting a change made following a 14 editors agreed-upon change made following a RFC.

--Omar-toons (talk) 07:09, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was not a "simple discussion", it was a successful proposed merge. That's about as much a "simple discussion" as a requested move or an RFD is. The result was unanimous. The discussion was left open for at least seven days, the standard length of time for requested moves, XFD's, proposed merge's, etc., during which any of the articles editors were free to participate in it. The deduction was about a year ago, consensus can change.
As for NPOV, do you have a concern about the neutrality of this article? Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 07:33, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I find it “highly appalling” that Moroccans are so bored as to push this bias so long. But whatever, been dealing with you goofs for seven years, you come and go. ¦ Reisio (talk) 08:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Several notes before we begin -
1)Full disclosure - Omar invited me here.
2) I participated extensively on the previous discussion, and I consider my self a neutral party here.
3) @Omar-toons - At first glance, I'm a tad confused as to what your concern is. The previous consensus was that the Flag of Western Sahara "should be an article detailing all the flags used to represent Western Sahara". I don't understand how merging Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic into Flag of Western Sahara is contrary to that consensus. Additionally, I sorta agree with Emmette Hernandez Coleman's assessment that "There isn't enough content here for two separate articles.".
Can you help me understand what the issue is by putting in really simple term what you feel is wrong with the article as it currently stands? Do you think the Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic features too prominently?
4) Given that Reisio is the pro-Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic editor and Omar is the pro-Moroccon editor here, a neutral solution is likely to upset both of you. NickCT (talk) 13:15, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You’re invited here by Omar and I’m the biased one, clever. :p ¦ Reisio (talk) 09:28, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment [from uninvolved editor, invited by user OmarTooms due to my participation in prior RfC] Ditto what NickCT said: Omar: I thought the result of the prior RfC was a merger: "The page should be an article detailing all the flags used to represent Western Sahara with the relevant information (i.e. Flag of Morocco, Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Regional flags of Western Sahara, Historical flags used in Western Sahara). See Flag of Korea for a slightly crude example." How has that prior RfC been violated by this new merger? --Noleander (talk) 14:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's been 16 days sense that merge discussion began, 9 days sense the articles have been merged, 3 days sense Omar-toons invited a bunch of people to this deduction, and he's the only person who's against the merge (aside from one person at the ANI who's objection was purely procedural), and one person here who says he "sorta agree[s] with Emmette Hernandez Coleman's assessment that ""There isn't enough content here for two separate articles."". It seems that the only opposition to the merge is from Omar-toons. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 22:13, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Hmm. Well, I don't necessarily disagree with a merge. However, the article needs to be renamed. Flag of Western Sahara" is not a thing; the title is confusing and makes little sense. "Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic" was a distinct topic. Merging short stubs together is okay, but the page needs to be moved to "Flags of Western Sahara".

  • Articles that actually distinguish among multiple distinct instances of related items can be sensibly given a plural title when the alternative would be to create an inappropriately large number of short articles, one on each instance. --WP:AT

Nightw 09:00, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Nightw re "needs to be moved to "Flags of Western Sahara"" - Strikes me as reasonable. NickCT (talk) 13:40, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
“"Flag of Western Sahara" is not a thing”
Strange then that so many would consider it a thing, including before the SADR existed, and before Morocco invaded the territory (hence the name of Western Sahara [in English]). :p ¦ Reisio (talk) 06:28, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Reisio - A reasonable point. It might be a tad more nuanced to say "At this point in time, the Flag of Western Sahara is not a widely recognized thing." NickCT (talk) 16:37, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever thing that so many would consider it is not the thing that the article currently describes. This article is about multiple things. See the discussions above. Either we agree that the article covers multiple subjects and pluralise the title to reflect WP:AT, or we go with Stradivarius' idea (undo the merge and have a full discussion for which all participants are properly notified). Nightw 13:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This article was already about multiple things, the merge didn't change that. This article was and is about the flags of WS, and the former SADR flag article (now a section of this article) is about the SADR flag specifically. Everyone who participated in the RFC was informed of the merge by Omar 6 days ago, and no one other then Omar himself has objected. Whatever procedural problems there were with the original merge are now moot, we now have conciseness for it. It's 3, arguably 4 to 1. That said I definitely don't object to adding an "s" to the title, it seems to better reflect the long-standing scope. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 13:51, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"This article was already about multiple things, the merge didn't change that" -> This article is about a disputed subject, and the merge made it POV, that's the problem. --Omar-toons (talk) 03:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly is your concern about the neutrality of this article? Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 17:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
How is the article, as it currently stands, POV? Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 17:29, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add the s to the title
Why did you do that when you're against it? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 01:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

naming convention per WPMOS

[edit]

I moved it back to no "s" as the standard on Wikipedia-even when there are competing factions, like Syria now, see history of Flag of Libya during 2011, the dispute is noted but the name remains singular. Also, why is there no proper lead paragraph?--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 01:47, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

if it's that easy, write it instead of complaining. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 01:48, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It was a question, wiseguy. AGF much? I was asking if maybe it got deleted or something.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 03:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
someone who just jumps in and reverts w/o discussing doesn't deserve AGF Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 04:33, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so you're not familiar with WP:AGF, WP:MOS, or WP:BOLD. I'll remember that, asshole--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 04:39, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
and you obviously don't give a damn about NPA. So since you're so good at ignoring ongoing discussions, why don't you just ignore everybody again and write the lead. I'm sure your rulebook will be an excellent guide. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 04:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV Noticeboard

[edit]

This article is currently under discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard#Flag_and_Coat_of_arms_of_Western_Sahara_.2F_SADR. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 04:47, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Morocco revert

[edit]

Regarding this revert, speaking pearly of the reverted edits addition to the "Flag of Morocco" section, it looks fine to me. That section should describe the national flag of Morocco as it relates to WS (see Flag of Kosovo#Use of the Serbian flag for a model), and that's what the addition does. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 06:20, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

per WP:NPOV, no flag (therefore, no claim) should be given more weight than the other one. --Omar-toons (talk) 06:33, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And that means you get to war over this? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 20:10, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are the one warring over this, don't you see that you are reverting a reorganisation of the article, that no information was deleted? --Omar-toons (talk) 20:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Crescent and star of SADR's flag

[edit]

Actually, the crescent and the star of the flag in the infobox and the construction sheet aren't consistent. Any one to fix that? --Omar-toons (talk) 06:49, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See commons:File talk:Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.svg#General update, Talk:Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic#General update and the #Official flag section above. These construction sheets come from some Spanish website that claims they made the flag, but User:HCPUNXKID seemed convinced that the sheets are official and kept putting them back. SiBr4 (talk) 11:04, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I kept putting them back as the makers of the work stated that it was commissioned by the Sahrawi delegation in Spain, that means, an organism part of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. If that's not official, I dont know what it is... Regards,--HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:28, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at Ciudad Futura's page again, I found something about who made the sheets below the section on the colors (translated in Google Translate):
Authorship: solidarity work of graphic design studio Paco Arnau, 2010-2011, freely available to the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), the Polisario Front and entities and initiatives of solidarity with the Saharawi people.
So if I understand it correctly, the sheets were made several years ago by some Spanish graphics studio which wanted the SADR to adopt their flag by presenting it to the Sahrawi embassy in Madrid. If that's the case, the sheets are not official SADR work until the SADR officially adopts the 2:3 flag. SiBr4 (talk) 19:53, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that you dont understand nothing or worse, that you dont want to understand nothing... I translate the first paragraph to English with some Google Translate help: "At the urging of activists sympathetic to the cause of Western Sahara, one of the last territories to be decolonized in the planet, and the office in Madrid of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, we've been commissioned late last year to develop and unify the graphical representation of the principal symbol of the whole nation: its flag. Some raids had already been done by us in the field of graphic-design-and vexillology in heraldry." If you still dont understand it, Ill tell you more clearly: it was the SADR office in Madrid who contacted that Spanish studio to order them that work, and not viceversa. If that is not enough to see that that work is a SADR officially sanctioned work, I really dont know what should be needed to show that...--HCPUNXKID (talk) 15:14, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for not understanding Spanish and misinterpreting the Google translation. I first interpreted the word "commissioned" as meaning that the SADR ambassadors in Madrid discussed with each other whether to adopt the flag, as the first paragraph doesn't say anything about the graphics studio. After I discovered the "authorship" paragraph at the bottom of the page, which says the sheets were made by Madrid studio Paco Arnau, I concluded that this studio asked (commissioned) the SADR to adopt their flag via the embassy. I misread the translation, thought the first sentence was meant to be "At the urging of activists (...), we commissioned the office in Madrid (...) to develop and unify ..." and didn't read it as "At the urging of activists (...) and [at the urging of] the office in Madrid (...) we commissioned to develop and unify ...". You also never clearly explained your interpretation before: when I said the SADR embassy made the sheets, you basically seemed to say "if that's true, it's official" every time, and to my second explanation above, you didn't reply at all until way after I had removed the sheets. AGF a bit. SiBr4 (talk) 17:26, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My best suggestion is to contact http://www.polisario.es/ (the delegation website) and see what is going on. However, I do have some concerns. The ratio of the flags in Spain and most of Europe (who have a strong backing of SADR) are 2x3, so maybe it is to conform to that? Two, can an embassy override what national offices have sent before in the past? Because if the national SADR government still uses 1x2 and declares 1x2, but this embassy uses something different, who should we go with. There is nothing wrong with presenting this other version, but I am still very unsure about how official this one is. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:24, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Obverse and reverse

[edit]
obverse and reverse of SADR flag

As far as i know, the crescent and star are supposed to be on one side on the flag, the one with the pole on the right of the seer, i.e. the usually reverse (for westerners) side, wich serves as the obverse. the other side then look exactly like the palestinian flag.2A01:E0A:984:A320:1C3C:3BF4:4ED8:62B2 (talk) 01:14, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per RfC above : how this article should look like?

[edit]

After the merging of the articles "Flag of Western Sahara" and "Flag of the SADR", we obtained an unbalanced version giving more weight and more visibility to SADR's flag while the flag of Morocco is only given 1 line on the whole article. As Wikipedia (per NPOV core policy) can't support any claimant at the detriment of the other one, this article has to be redrawn.

According to the RfC above, the article should be "a page explaining and linking to the various flags used to represent the territory, similar to Flag of Korea". Does the article look like Flag of Korea? I doubt.

I hope that we can get a consensus on this talk page, or else we will, unfortunately, we will have to go to a new RfC. --Omar-toons (talk) 00:23, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction

[edit]

As for the Unification flag section of Flag of Korea, this article should contain a section explaining that there's no official flag for the territory of Western Sahara, as it was the case of the pre-merging article. --Omar-toons (talk) 00:25, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Claimed flags

[edit]

As there's no internationally recognized official flag of Western Sahara, the equivalent of the section National flags of the article Flag of Korea should be replaced by its equivalent for Western Sahara case, ie a section called "Claimant's flags", detailing the flags used by each claimant and their description. --Omar-toons (talk) 00:29, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article and Flag of Korea have both evolved in different derisions, neither looks much like Flag of Korea used to. This in not because of the merge, pre-merge this article doesn't look like Flag of Korea eater.
It appearers I'm the one who removed the sentence "There is no official flag for the territory of Western Sahara since its sovereignty is disputed between Morocco and the Polisario Front." It was probably an accident (or sub-conscious), I don't remember doing that, and if I had meant to it probably wouldn't have been in the same edit that I merged the articles in. Regardless it hasn't been in the article sense February, so a new consensus would be required to re-add it.
There is no universally recognized official flag of Kosovo, or flag of Nagorno-Karabakh, or flag of Abkhazia (all disputed territories) ether.
There is also no universally recognized official flag of Palestine (disputed territory), so treating that article differently from this one is a clear POV and double standard, logically.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 15:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Of course Palestinian flag is recognized universally - it is an observer state in the UN!GreyShark (dibra) 10:15, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To summarize the point I made here "Flag of Morocco" section is a stub-section, that's why it only has one line, not because less weight is being given to it. It (along with Flag of Abkhazia#Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia) simply needs to be developed with content that describes the national flag of Morocco as it relates to WS (I added a {{stub-section}} tag). Flag of Kosovo#Use of the Serbian flag proves that that is possible. Nether Flag of Abkhazia#Autonomous Republic of Abkhazia nor Flag of Kosovo#Use of the Serbian flag tries to duplicate the Flag of Georgia (country)/Flag of Serbia, they limit themselves to describing those flags as they relate to those deputed territories. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 00:03, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some users dont understand difference between SADR & Western Sahara

[edit]

Do you understand the difference between Western Sahara and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic? It doesnt seem so, as you still add the flag of Morocco to the SADR flag page (not the Western Sahara flag page that you deleted, there it could be more reasonable to add the Moroccan flag, in the SADR page is simply non-sense and agit-prop). If this continues, Ill had to add the SADR flag to the Morocco flag page, otherwise it would be a clear case of double standards, logically.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 15:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Western Sahara wasn't deleted, it is Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic which was merged into this page and is now a redirect to it. Flag of Western Sahara now discusses the flags of both states that claim Western Sahara (Morocco and the SADR). SiBr4 (talk) 19:41, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Morocco don't claim the whole Western Sahara region; they claim Southern Provinces (more than half however). SADR control about 1/4 of WS region, but of course claim the all of it.GreyShark (dibra) 10:06, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unmerging Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic

[edit]

I propose to unmerge the article of Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, which is a notable topic and was merged with no proper consensus. I think that the attempt to delete/merge the SADR flag article is in order to deliberately confuse the readers that "Western Sahara" actually exists as a political entity on the map, while in reality it is divided (most of it occupied and annexed by Morocco) and only 1/3 or 1/4 is part of SADR). Western Sahara doesn't have any flag, but SADR does. The best we can do is make "Flag of Western Sahara" a disambig page.GreyShark (dibra) 10:11, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree WP:COMMONNAME dictates that this flag should be named this title. It's also the Polisario flag as well: it represents several discrete things but there is only one flag that is meant to represent Western Sahara and that's this one. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Flag of Western Sahara. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:04, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Stealth Reversion to Pre consensus (Jan 2012) NPOV

[edit]

Despite the above consensus on an NPOV approach to the flag issue, this has reverted by stealth to its 2011 state. I will restore it to consensus NPOV. collounsbury (talk) 12:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A six-year long gap between consensuses is "stealthy?" Based on the content of the talk page, it's been contested ever since. One year or even six months would be long enough for editors to call for another discussion, six years is more than enough time to challenge it. I agree with the argument that the user Koavf made many years ago: nobody uses the term "Flag of Western Sahara" to refer to any other flag. Morocco doesn't even have a Western Sahara flag other than the flag of Morocco itself, which the users can read about on Flag of Morocco. This is about the entity most commonly referred to as "Western Sahara" whose flag you can find by typing {{flagicon|Western Sahara}} Western Sahara. Flag of South Ossetia doesn't have to include the flag of Georgia, the user can learn about it at Flag of Georgia. Flag of Somaliland doesn't have to be about the flag of Somalia because users can learn about it by reading Flag of Somalia. Not every single article relating to states with limited recognition must make sure to describe the territorial disputes with the de jure states that claim the same territory, and if anything to claim otherwise is the POV-charged argument. Brendon the Wizard ✉️ ✨ 00:26, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Flag_of_Western_Sahara&oldid=1195361328"