Jump to content

Talk:Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia

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

This whole article looks like an ad for Saudi Arabia. Nothing is exactly false but it isn't balanced or reflective of the many negative things about ANY government. Just look at the section about Pakistani/Saudi Arabia relations. This is just like an "advert"

There is only a pro Saudi viewpoint. I labled the article Point of View and AD. When you write a balanced article remove said tags 63.26.123.156 (talk) 06:07, 8 December 2008 (UTC)eric[reply]


This article as is sounds like a press release from the saudi embassy. It's all sugar and spice. Klonimus 07:55, 16 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. The first paragraph is somewhat complimentary but the rest doesn't come across as very pro- saudi. Have you got any specific examples of how it is 'sugar and spice'? Entsuropi 18:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also disagree with Klonimus. It doesnt sound like that to me...They just say many facts about Saudi Arabia...there is no problem with that... Invader05 01:57, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is Saudi Arabia a neutral country? The first sentence says as much (using the words "non-aligned," but I checked the article it links to & Saudi Arabia didn't even show up in a text search. I am not an expert, so (since either article could be wrong) I'm asking here. If I don't hear from anyone, I will eventually get around to finding out which is correct & changing one or the other. Devon.underwood (talk) 04:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is correct that Saudi Arabia is a non-aligned state. The whole problem is that it is linked to the wrong article, namely "Neutrality", whereas it should be "Non-Aligned Movement". Neutrality is a different concept. So, I will try to change that.. Mademoiselle Bunbury (talk) 16:09, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very "sugar & spice..."

[edit]

Foreign relations history with the US needed to be expanded as a bridge to the current status of US/KSA relations. Oil and Islam were major influences and warrants the recently added facts.

i am changing

[edit]

some idiot connected a saudi letter and 9/11. Seems prrpaganda and some dumb conspiracy theorists idea. I am deleting it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Uch (talk • contribs) 14:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Sugar and Spice

[edit]

Fact is, Wikipedia is not the place to give your biased opinions on things. It's a place for verifiable facts, and facts alone.

Human Rights

[edit]

The Human Rights section needs some citations etc, refs to Amnesty Int etc. At the moment it looks like someones rant. I have removed the following line from the article and put it here for the time being.

Many prominent members of society have gotten away scot-free for crimes that deserve punishment helped by a judicial system having no transparency.

If anyone wants to put it back please remember "Wikipedia:Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's core content policies. The others include Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in Wikipedia articles." Sean.hoyland (talk) 09:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

with India

[edit]

I removed an inappropriate section consisting of a multiparagraph press release. 02:51, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Proposed WikiProject - Bilateral relations

[edit]

There is now a upstart WikiProject to establish a concensus about WP's International bilateral relations articles, including "X-Y (country) relations" articles, at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Bilateral international relations. Interested parties should add their names at Wikipedia:WikiProject International relations/Bilateral relations task force if they wish to play a part in the discussions or have an Interest in this going forward. Thank you for your attention. CaribDigita (talk) 00:06, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Official status with Israel

[edit]

Cease fire from 1967 (did Saudi Arabia sign it?), a different cease fire or are they official at war?--Oneiros (talk) 16:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Japan

[edit]

Who on earth has written the section about "Japan"? It is almost illegible.. I must admit I'm not a native speaker, but this is certainly neither correct English, nor can I really understand what it's about.. (well, obviously, guessing helps, but that's not the way it's supposed to be in an encyclopedia, right?) Maybe somebody who has some insight about the topic could be so kind and rewrite it? Mademoiselle Bunbury (talk) 10:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Partial re-write Feb 2011

[edit]

I've deleted a chunk of this (the bulk of the 'press release' style text) and inserted what I believe is a NPOV overview with WP:RS. (I originally wrote this for the Saudi Arabia article. I haven't yet got to the bilateral sections, but will in time re-write those. I think I've done enough to delete the 'advertisement' tage at the top but will now do so since I've not had any adverse comment. Please post if you disagree. DeCausa (talk) 23:22, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removed empty section

[edit]

Removed the section on Bahrain since it was empty — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheHorizonist (talk • contribs) 07:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV Tag

[edit]

Lots of issues with this article but

During the Arab Summit in August 1967 in Khartoum after the Israeli aggression against Egypt, Syria and Jordan in 1967

should be a good place to start the discussion. Sheesh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.84.128.203 (talk) 03:18, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

subjectivity in views

[edit]

The article describes the public relation of saudi arabia of important points to western socity and english speakers. On other side, didn't mention any detaials about the unity and relation of arab and gulf countries and importance of such relation for arab community as well as muslim community. The article definitly didn't forgot to describes Saudi Arabia aid in terms of wahabism or old school muslim in which other media channels might overestimate and/or criticize for unpublished goals. This is a usualy topic in english sites about Saudi Arabia in which had a lot of subjectivity.

I read about other talks and views about the article. Moreover, how much spices or sugar in this article. At this point, The article is westren view of Saudi Arabia forign relation that highliten some areas of forign relation. It is not the full true relation of saudi arabia foreign relation as it is known to arabs and muslims countries. The views of human rights inside saudi arabia had been magnified in two areas, women driving and freedom of speech, that well respected and repeated in all discussion of english sites and news channels.

There are different views of writing an article about saudi arabia or other country. Especialy for article in public site, there is hard work done to have some fair amount of objectivity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.212.7.70 (talk) 20:27, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "arabnews.com":

  • From Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (Saudi Arabia): [1] Arab News
  • From Philippines–Saudi Arabia relations: "Manila, Riyadh bilateral ties at their best | Arab News — Saudi Arabia News, Middle East News, Opinion, Economy and more". Arabnews.com. 2013-06-12. Retrieved 2013-08-06.
  • From 2015 Mina stampede: "Tehran: Mina crush was 'beyond human control'". Arab News. 2 October 2015. Retrieved 2 October 2015.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 07:52, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia. 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) 21:50, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://studies.aljazeera.net/en/dossiers/2015/03/201533172623652531.html. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:27, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Islam Hassan":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 02:33, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia. 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) 18:03, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia. 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) 22:05, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Foreign_relations_of_Saudi_Arabia&oldid=1207267339"