Jump to content

Talk:Mauritania/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Transportation

Can someone that knows about this add details of Mauritania's transport system, ie road, rail, etc. As far as i know the country has one of the longest trains in the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wakeyjamie (talk • contribs) 14:05, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Religion

How is it 99% muslim and 16% christian? jackmont Now it's 100% Muslim...somehow I find that hard to beleive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baskilisk (talk • contribs) 20:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Weird sentance

White and black Maurs consider themselves Arab, whereas black Arabs see themselves as African.....Um this doesn't make sense White and black Moors see themselves as ARABS but black ARABS do not see themselves as Arabs? im confused —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.193.49.44 (talk) 05:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

regions

Why have the regions being listed on this page now? Every other country has an individual page for each of it's regions - why should Mauritania be any different. Granted, they may not be full of detail, but that's beside the point. They may not look much, but maps will be added soon enough for each region in the same vein as Lesotho or Djibouti. Besides, the move is pointless without the deletion of the individual region pages. I'm tempted to remove the regions on this main page, but I'll wait for a reply first.

- sdrawkcab

"The Bafours were primarily agriculturalist, among the first Saharan people to abandon their historically nomadic lifestyle."

So were they agricultural or nomadic? Can someone clear that up thanks.

Military coup, August 2005

This is the communiqué issued by the coup leaders on 3 August. I wasn't sure where it belonged in the article so I'll link it here. --Cam 16:16, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

I changed the wording of the promised elections to reflect the fact that they were organized and certified.216.152.208.1 22:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Military coup 2008

I am questioning the use of arrest by the military coup. No legal authority authorized the "arrest" so I would use the proper "detained" as the CNN article states here. http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/08/06/mauritania.coup.ap/index.html. Also, I question using bloodless because no one really knows what is happening fully.--Truthfulchat (talk) 15:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Contradicting voting results

The poll results for the 2003 election for Maaouya Ould Sid'Ahmed Taya show 66.69% compared to the 67.02% on Mauritania. Laundrypowder 20:50, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

  • The original result reported by the Interior Ministry on 8 November 2003 was 66.69% for Taya [1]. However, the final official result as certified by the Constitutional Council on 12 November 2003 was 67.02% [2]. --Cam 23:24, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Well that makes sense. I suppose then that the issue is at Maaouya Ould Sid'Ahmed Taya and not here. However, as the numbers apparantly can be confused maybe a distinction or source would help. Thanks for the clarification! Laundrypowder 16:15, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Official Languges

Does anyone know what the official languges are? Before it sayed that Arabic, French, Hassaniya, Pular, Soninke, and Wolof were all official languges. – Zntrip 04:20, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Article 6 of the 1991 constitution says [3]:
".اللغات الوطنية هي العربية والبلارية و السوننكية والولفية. اللغة الرسمية هي العربية"
"Al-lughât al-watanîyah hîya al-`arabîyah w-al-bulârîyah w-as-sûninkîyah w-al-wulufîyah. Al-lughah ar-rasmîyah hîya al-`arabîyah."
(I probably botched the above romanization, use with caution.)
French translation [4]: "Les langues nationales sont l'arabe, le poular, le soninké et le wolof ; la langue officielle est l'arabe."
My English translation of the French: "The national languages are Arabic, Fula, Soninke, and Wolof; the official language is Arabic."
Hope this helps.
--Cam 05:35, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks :) that helps alot. – Zntrip 20:09, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

I would really like to know more about the status of French in Mauritania. I mean, the gouvernements official sites are written in French, the national motto is in French, the political parties have French names et cetera. French was co-official with Arabic untill 1991. Maybe one should call it de-facto official? Aaker 09:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

French language plays a big part in Mauritania. Altough it has been removed as an official language it is still important in the commercial sector, and the upperclass who tend to speak more French then Arabic.

"The use of English and the Weldiya dialect is increasing" Problem: "Weldiya" is spoken in Ethiopia. Better take this out. Murad Hamdan (talk) 10:59, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Spelling in Romanisation

I note Wikipedia renders the ancient Roman province as Mauretania and the modern state as Mauritania. While this is convenient (and has much to recommend it in some ways for clarity), unfortunately modern English usage also uses Mauretania for the modern country's transliteration into roman characters, especially a UK usage (see, e.g. http://www.immigrationexpert.com/uk/embassyPage.asp?letter=m ). While the US influenced usage Mauritania seems to dominate, it would be incorrect to imply that the second spelling is not used in standard usage for the modern country. A disamgiuation page for both spellings is needed. (Collounsbury 18:45, 1 March 2006 (UTC))

Economy

Is there a reason that the economic section is being treated as a seperate article? I think it would make more sense to include the economic article as part of the Mauritania article.

Most countries have separate articles on their economies, called "Economy of X". For example, Economy of Mali, Economy of Niger, Economy of Senegal etc. --Cam 00:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I can understand that being the case if the article on the economy is rather long, but wouldn't it be more sensible to include shorter articles within the main country article? Even if the economy is to be kept as a separate entry, wouldn’t it at least be better to include a short overview of the economy in the Mauritania article as is the case with some other countries? scotsboyuk 14:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I hadn't noticed that there was no economy info here. Yes, someone should add an overview here as you suggested. --Cam 15:11, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Merged. Standalone article was far too short to merit separation. I've read every nation article on wikipedia, and was annoyed by the lack of economic info in this article. If there's much more to say about the economy of Mauritania, feel free to expand a standalone article, but a mere link under "Economy" in the main article is unacceptable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.39.182.234 (talk • contribs)

I randomly (literally) came across the Economy of Mauritania article, and found when I went to the parent there was no link to it. Have added the link, someone might want to crosscheck the two are in sync (i.e. one isn't using older data for the same economic metric etc.), I doubt you can really merge it in fully as the subarticle has a large template which would look out of place in a section imo. I agree that the subarticle is on the short side, but equally agree with the above that there should be at least one paragraph overview in the main article if it had all previously been removed to the subarticle. Sfnhltb 20:34, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Possible Racial Bias of Article

Where is this information coming from that the Blacks were Slaves of White North Africans? In addition this article is written with a slanted POV. There is a difference from Mauritania and Mauretania as well. When was there a name change and why? In adition Mauretania refers to Maure or Moorish Africans of Ethiopic origins.--Gnosis 06:44, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I think that [5] may have been the source of the statement that "white" Moors enslaved "black" Moors. I assume that "white" means Berber/Arab. Regards, Rodney Boyd 18:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I think it would be better to describe the implied racial meaning of the terms. It would be better to say lighter skinned because the term white and black have varied meanings. To be honest the best thing to do is not bring up the race meme and just focus on the groups of people. Since the caste system is really based on light to dark skin color. We should keep the rece terms from this article to prevent debate. Berbers were not all light skinned or "white" and "black" these terms hold no value in terms of true meaning. As race is an ideology or concept created which has been proven to not exist. I have removed the tag however. In addition, the US government is a poor source to provide proof. As the terms of race are continuously being defined and actuality didn't exist before the creation of the American government.--Gnosis 19:31, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Just to add to Gnosis point, defining by race can bring nothing productive. The american government has changed its meaning of who is what race. Up until the 1960's the us government considered egyptians black, but that is not really in practivce anymore. As well race definitions seems to change from country to country, eg any black ancestry means your black in america, simply looking black or having dark skin means your black in latin american countries, and europeans seem to say anyone who is not white is black but they don't seem to have a very definitve system as we do. Point is race is subjective and unhelpful unless you are talking about absouluts. Eg. hitler was white and shaka zulu was black, which is still not helpful, what kind of culture were the two would be the questiion most would ask


"We should keep the rece terms from this article to prevent debate" - I feel that statement rather interesting. This article needs more debate, not less.

Supposedly contains at least one CIA prison for detainees of the "War on Terror". http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003453.php 24.12.177.254 17:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)Nate


Several interesting points. One solution would be to use the terms used by the ethnic groups themselves: "haratine" (plural, meaning "freed slave") for the black moors, and "beithan" (plural, meaning "white-ish") for the white moors.--SidiLemine 13:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

2007 Presidential election ---> Slavery ?!?!?

I saw the following sentence in the section about the 2007 presidential election:

"Slavery is still said to exist in Mauritania , some 100 years after slavery officially ended in the West and since it was officially abolished in the country in 1981."

What does this have to do with the 2007 presidential election? tildetildetildetilde

I removed it since the source was a broken link.--SidiLemine 10:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Interesting, I found this page when looking at the Slavery article. It said "Slavery in Mauritania was finally criminalized in August 2007." and gave a source http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6938032.stm, also, the Slavery_in_Modern_Africa article gives more information on the criminilization of slavery in Mauritania. Looks like this doc needs an update. I'd do it but I'm at work ;) 198.6.46.11 14:02, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

what they eat and belive

+-=+-=+-=+-= Mauritania eats grapes, red and green, fish, and fish balls. The women think that it is healthy to feed their daughters, until they are large.

== It Should be Noted that modern day slavery still exists here and a section should be added== i', no good at writing a whole section but here's a link to help get someone started [[6]] --Parker (talk) 19:35, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

People

Life expectancy

male: 51.61 years

female: 56.28 years (2008 est.)

Source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/mr.html#People

I have a question

Is it true that they are slaves, aproaximitly 300.000 to 500.000 in Mauritania?? source http://www.france24.com/en/20090218-former-slave-ten-year-walk-freedom-not-over-mauritania-slavery —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.205.40.64 (talk) 15:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Slavery

wiki ADMINS please take the time to read this. I am more than happy to elaborate here. Please stop removing my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rimman (talk • contribs) 00:38, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

All talk about slavery in Mauritania is just that, talk. The Mauritanian former president and the current chief MP are blacks. The latter is actually a slave descendant. There are few black individuals, most outside the country, who are trying to capitalize on the sufferings of the poor black community within Mauritania. Note that poverty in Mauritania does not have a race or color. It goes across all segments of the population. Slavery, human trafficking are criminal acts under Mauritanian constitution and applicable laws.

Black people can have slaves (they even did in the U.S.)Mukogodo (talk) 20:15, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Locator map

Hello. Recently, an editor added a locator map to this article (with orange highlights and a horrid Mercator projection) which is of a style that is not only inconsistent with the locator maps in most country articles but has done so without any discussion or consensus. This map is disagreeable and not an improvement over the prior one; consequently, I have restored the prior long-standing map. I believe a renewed consensus needs to be demonstrated before the map is changed again. Thoughts? Bosonic dressing (talk) 02:30, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Ancient Mauritania

I notice that the article states that "It is named after the Roman province whose borders were roughly equivalent to those of the modern country." The 2 or 3 Roman provinces whose names included Mauretania were on the north coasts of modern Morocco and Algeria. Their borders were at least 700 kilometres from the northern tip of modern Mauritania. Vgy7ujm (talk) 00:26, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Ghana Empire

I noticed the History section says the Almoravids from the north conquered the Ghana Empire, but the page about the Almoravids just says there is speculation that the Almoravids destabilized, and caused the fall Ghana. I wouldn't know where to look for an authority on this, but should the statement be taken out/revised? 99.109.56.150 (talk) 04:49, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Source material

Was tooling around CNN, and found an article on de facto slavery within the country. Thought someone here might be interested in using it. :) - Jack Sebastian (talk) 02:29, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

The CNN documentary deliberately omitted that the former president, current chief MP and half of the current government are all slave descendants. Additionally, Mauritania has a vibrant black middle class. Also, it omitted that recently the Mauritanian government created a special agency to fight the sequels of slavery, which are essentially economic and social injustice. Mauritania has lots of problems. But, slavery is not one of them.

Why did CNN omit all these important facts? Ask them CNN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rimman (talk • contribs) 19:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

This isn't a discussion page about Mauritania. And anything contentious added to the article needs a source that meets our criteria at WP:RS and WP:VERIFY. You can't add your own personal commentary, including comments on what CNN didn't say. You can add information about its constitution, the agency that you mention, etc so long as what you add is sourced and doesn't include commentary. See also WP:NOR. You also need to read WP:BLP because one of the fastest ways to get blocked is to add contentious material on living people that doesn't have very good sources - again, by our criteria. A lot of reading but you really need to read the linked material before you continue to add the material which other editors have removed. Dougweller (talk) 20:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I have reverted this rewrite by Rimman (talk · contribs) because of several glaring problems:

  • Unencyclopedic language, slander, libel, not supported by the sited sources: "which he won by a very suspicious 52%", "A documentary of misrepresentation and falsehood produced by CNN", "This documentary intentionally omitted", "This outrageously unfair deal was pushed by the current military junta chief Mohamed Ould Abd Al Aziz given under the table payments by Kinross that is allegedly made personally to him".
  • Strong, unsourced claims: "FLAM is seen by most Mauritanians as a racist pro-Senegalese organization", "These charges are well known to be baseless and mainly motivated by Black elite diaspora who use these allegations to gain stature, prominence, and some time, financial support from western human rights organizations."
  • Factual errors: " about 40% of the Mauritanian population live on less than US$1.25 per day" (the source says 21%).
  • WP:Synthesis: that half of the government are slave descendants and that slavery is condemned in the Constitution had no relevance to actual practices.
  • The paragraphs on Kinross and the 3% Contract and Human rights are also unsourced. Materialscientist (talk) 04:13, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Two Geography sections: reason for deleting the irrelevant one

Currently the article contains an early section called Geography and Climate and a later section called Geography. The Geography and climate section reads as follows:

West Africa, if one includes the western portion of the Maghreb (Western Sahara, Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia), occupies an area in excess of 6,140,000 km2, or approximately one-fifth of Africa. The vast majority of this land is plains lying less than 300 meters above sea level, though isolated high points exist in numerous countries along the southern shore of the region.[9]
The northern section of West Africa is composed of semi-arid terrain known as Sahel, a transitional zone between the Sahara and the savannahs of the western Sudan. Forests form a belt between the savannas and the southern coast, ranging from 160 km to 240 km in width.[10] The west African region of Mauritania periodically suffers country-wide plagues of locusts which consume water, salt and crops on which the human population relies. [11]

First, this is almost entirely about West Africa, not specifically about Mauritania. Second, it is copied and pasted word-for-word from the article West Africa. Third, the Sahel is not in the northern section of West Africa as claimed here in paragraph 2, especially since paragraph 1 defines West Africa as going all the way up to Tunisia. And fourth, there's already a good section called Geography. So I'm deleting the Geography and climate section. Duoduoduo (talk) 14:24, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Western Africa / Western North Africa

Of course, it's possible to find sources that say Mauritania is in Western North Africa. I see 183 results on Google Book Search. However, that doesn't mean it's the best label; "West Africa" is almost a thousand times more common. bobrayner (talk) 00:51, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

yes there was a time when Mauritania pivoted towards west Africa in the 60s, but it is now firmly on the path of arabization, like Sudan, pivoting it towards North Africa once again. Most sources indicate how it straddles the Maghreb and West Africa so it really could be either as its history over thousands of years as a crossroads of West Africa and North Africa shows. But today Mauritania is: (1)a declared Islamic republic; (2) with Arabic as an official language; (3) on an official Arabization scheme; (4) part of the Arab Maghreb Union; (5) no longer a member of ECOWAS....Ever since the coup 16 years ago it seems firmly in western North Africa today. Of course it could always change---these are not static categories, remember the Sahara itself only underwent rapid desertification in 3500 B.C., also remember Sudan could just as easily lose its membership in North Africa if it underwent de-Arabization... See, for example: http://www.nai.uu.se/publications/news/archives/002diallo/ "Mauritania – neither Arab nor African - The Nordic Africa Institute, www.nai.uu.se › Publishing › 'News from NAI' › Archives‎ "Mauritania has not paid its membership contribution to ECOWAS for the last 16 years, since Colonel Ould Taya seized power through a coup." "In view of the current regional and global integration, it is difficult to understand why the Mauritanian President, Colonel Sid Ahmed Ould Taya, decided to leave ECOWAS, especially at a time when Mauritania's relations with its traditional allies - the Arab world and France - are at their worst. Ould Taya's stated reason for leaving ECOWAS is the organisation's decision to establish a common currency by 2004, for which the regime is not ready to give up its own currency, the Ouguiya. However, the real problem is that Mauritania has no intention to integrate or have an open-border policy with black Africa. Mauritania has not paid its membership contribution to ECOWAS for the last 16 years, since Colonel Ould Taya seized power through a coup. Situated on the cultural divide between black Africa and Arab North Africa, Mauritania suffers from a serious identity crisis. The regime's approach to this crisis has been to deny its African identity and bend over toward the Arab World. ..A meaningful West African integration will directly contradict Taya's ethnic cleansing policies...The decision to leave ECOWAS was strongly condemned by the African Liberation Forces (FLAM) which described it as racist. According to FLAM, the next regional body that Mauritania may leave is the Senegal River Development Agency (OMVS), which groups Mali, Mauritania and Senegal. FLAM, formed in 1983, is the only political organisation which challenges the ideological foundation of the regime. As such FLAM is illegal and its members have been the main target for exclusion, detention and killing. Also the main legal opposition party the Unions for Democratic Forces (UFD) condemned the decision to quit ECOWAS, especially after "having sabotaged Mauritania's relations with the Arab World and France"."- See more at: http://www.nai.uu.se/publications/news/archives/002diallo/#sthash.H6prTUbd.dpuf" etc. etc. That is my take...it seems these categories *at the borders* often reflect politics first and foremost...and the politics of Mauritania today seems to place it in the same category of Sudan (which also is now unambiguously North Africa due to its politics above all else).

Perhaps both? But really as it is not even part of ECOWAS...!

Could it say "often considered part of northern West Africa or western North Africa" and then put a reference to the debate. Or "considered both part of North Africa and West Africa," with a reference to the Arabization scheme.

How about: "As it culturally, geographically and demographically straddles the border of the Arab Maghreb and Sub-Saharan Africa, Mauritania has historically been considered both part of North Africa and West Africa"

Andajara120000 (talk) 04:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

capital

capital of tiris zemmour? it says Fderick but if you click on the region it says Zouérat? which is right? Reedman72 (talk) 03:56, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Fderik / Fort-Gouraud was capital of the region until 1998, then it moved to Zouérat. bobrayner (talk) 21:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

"Not to be confused with Mauritius."

Just wondering: isn't the "Not to be confused with Mauritius." sentence at the top of the article a little wierd, perhaps even offensive? I mean, how would you feel reading about your country, and the first thing it says is "don't confuse this Mauritania-thing with this completely different Mauritius-thing that has nothing to do with it"? I understand some people may genuinely confuse Mauretania with Mauritius, which is unfortunate, and perhaps I am looking at this the wrong way, but overall, shouldn't the statement be removed? I mean, we don't preface the United States page with "Not to be confused with United Nations", even though that is, on the face of it, a much more plausible mix-up. 142.157.6.14 (talk) 15:26, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

Agree that it's weird - I don't think offense would be a reason to remove it, but I think it's unnecessary given that these are not words that need disambiguating. Since the prior note has been here for almost 2 years without comment, I removed the text/link.Jim0101 (talk) 19:47, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Issue of Western Sahara

The first sentence of this section states "Today's Western Sahara was historically under the rule of the Moroccan state prior to the colonization of Spain.[25]", however the link given as a reference does actually not support this statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.120.181.47 (talk) 18:12, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. I have removed this misinformation and have inserted a more accurate statement with an applicable reference. Akhooha (talk) 19:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Population

What about arabs tribes of banu Hassan who settled their and make a vast number of population? sahrawi are not berbers, they are mixed buy they are arabs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.1.241.119 (talk) 23:07, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Sahrawi are actually descended from ancient Libyan (Berber) groups, but adopted the Arabic language, culture and genealogical tradition with the spread of Islam. This is why the dominant paternal haplogroup is E1b1b-M81 like the adjacent Berber-speaking populations [7]. Soupforone (talk) 13:01, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mauritania. 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) 08:57, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

New Flag

As of the recent referendum, Mauritania has a new flag. See the flag in the article on French Wikipedia. DLMacLeod (talk) 02:28, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mauritania. 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) 13:44, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mauritania. 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) 18:32, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mauritania. 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) 14:48, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

The useless? page headings from 2014

These headers from 2014 are making pages look ugly and then they sit there for years? Reading this at the beginning of every other page might make one wonder about the usefulness of the information? Or the Supplier of that information.13:48, 7 June 2018 (UTC)24.108.234.254 (talk) '''Bold text'This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (September 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)24.108.234.254 (talk) 13:48, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

History since 2009?

Have there been no elections since 2009?

Recent addtions about slavery

Not sure this is the article for a huge section on slavery as per WP:UNDUE and let's face it the norm for country articles. I am sure most would agree that this is not the most pressing issue that needs to be highlighted here so prominently with quote after quote (lazy writing). We do in passing mention this in the "Human rights" section....thus why I moved it to Slavery in Mauritania as it seem to fit best there. However this was reverted so a talk I will start. I think the article Slavery in Mauritania is best as Human rights in Mauritania covers this and is a huge article already.--Moxy (talk) 18:30, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

I have no objection to the removal of the recent student edits from the Wiki Ed classes and addition to Human rights in Mauritania instead. However, most of the content of subsection "#Modern slavery" that was recently blanked (and again here, after a revert) had been in the article for at least five years. If there is one country in the world associated with slavery, it is this one. This section should not be blanked. I've restored the content of that section to the way it appeared in revision 856524262 of 20:57, August 25, 2018, just prior to the start of the student additions objected to. Mathglot (talk) 11:17, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
I will take the time this weekend and fix the section.--Moxy (talk) 14:40, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
The article is in not huge compared to articles on neighboring Western Sahara (101kb) or Algeria (126kb). That said, Mauritania is set up in summary style, with Slavery in Mauritania as one the child article of this section, one of the numerous other child articles as well as an Outline). The Slavery in Mauritania section is about 10% of the total body text (600::5920 words; excluding Lead, infobox, bottom matter). This is longer than #Geography (449w) or #Economy (458w), and about the same as #After the coup (620w). I think it would be fair to cut this section down to roughly the #Geography size, moving some material into the child article. Jus cutting the two long quotes would save 190 words. I'm not suggesting that's the only way to do it, just to give a rough idea of what we're dealing with as far as proportional length for a summary section about this topic.
I think a nice contrast would be to mention El Moctar's ridiculous assertion, contrasted with a well-sourced statement of continuing chattel slavery in Mauritania to this day. This would cut it even more; perhaps something like:

In 2012, a government minister stated that slavery "no longer exists" in Mauritania.[1] According to the Walk Free Foundation's Global Slavery Index, there were an estimated 90,000 enslaved people in Mauritania in 2018 or around 2% of the population.[2]

with El Moctar's full quote moved either to the child article, or into the footnote, as here. That would reduce it to below 400w. Mathglot (talk) 05:21, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
I went ahead and gave that last suggestion a try to see what it looks like, and also removed the long, right-float pull quote. In its current form, it now occupies about the same vertical height as the #Economy or #geography section, and easily fits in one viewport. I'm happy with it at this size, but if you wanted to cut it further, I'm sure you'd find some fat that could go. See what you think. Mathglot (talk) 06:26, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Mauritanian minister responds to accusations that slavery is rampant". CNN. 17 March 2012. I must tell you that in Mauritania, freedom is total: freedom of thought, equality – of all men and women of Mauritania... in all cases, especially with this government, this is in the past. There are probably former relationships – slavery relationships and familial relationships from old days and of the older generations, maybe, or descendants who wish to continue to be in relationships with descendants of their old masters, for familial reasons, or out of affinity, and maybe also for economic interests. But (slavery) is something that is totally finished. All people are free in Mauritania and this phenomenon no longer exists. And I believe that I can tell you that no one profits from this commerce.
  2. ^ "Country Data | Global Slavery Index Mauritania", Global Slavery Index, Walk Free Foundation, 2018, retrieved 2019-01-06

Lack of information on politics past 2009

Is there a reason beyond the fact that no one has updated it that there is no information on the last ten years of mauritanian politics? I don't know any good sources but i could put in some work to figure it out if it's just that no one else has done so yet. -Sophia (talk) 19:18, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Bidhan

Currently the references to Bidhan all point to the article on Sahrawi people, but that's not quite right. It would be more appropriate for them to point to the Beidane article, but that article is brief and lacks refs. Suggest redir to Beidane, though. Thoughts?Ordinary Person (talk) 15:21, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

redirected. starship.paint (exalt) 03:15, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Human rights in lead

I recently made an edit to the lead section of this article describing Mauritania's poor human right's record. I did so as the pages for many countries with similarly poor records tend to mention so and give some elaborate on the human rights issues, such as with Turkmenistan, Eritrea, Belarus and Saudi Arabia. It was undone for being perceived as "undue weight" with a request to explain why it should be included on the talk page. DeathTrain (talk) 21:46, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

  • @DeathTrain: - it's totally WP:UNDUE weight to give Amnesty International's opinion 35% of the lead of a country. There shouldn't be anything more than a sentence, and no Amnesty International opinion. If you want to add the first sentence, I'd suggest you also expand the lead in other ways, including on Society, Geography, Economy etc. starship.paint (talk) 04:18, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: So I did. I also took the liberty to add more on history, but there was already a section on geography. I would now say that the human rights section is not undue anymore.DeathTrain (talk) 00:04, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - again, no, we are not going to give Amnesty International such a prominent opinion. I have shortened it. starship.paint (talk) 01:59, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Mauritania has been criticized for its human rights record, including for Mauritania's continued practice of slavery, despite criminalizing it.

@Starship.paint:Why not? Other articles such as Turkmenistan have something similar: "According to Human Rights Watch, Turkmenistan remains one of the world’s most repressive countries. The country is virtually closed to independent scrutiny, media and religious freedoms are subject to draconian restrictions, and human rights defenders and other activists face the constant threat of government reprisal." DeathTrain (talk) 10:02, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
  • @DeathTrain: (1) WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, (2) WP:LEAD says that we summarize the most important points of the body. Your content is not even in the body, and is hardly a summary. I can't see something like "Internet was shut down" being one of the most important points of Mauritania. starship.paint (talk) 11:22, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Would you say it is now appropriate to add torture to the lead section now? DeathTrain (talk) 23:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: The human rights section in the article does mention various abuses as reported by groups like Amnesty International such as torture, arbitrary imprisonment, and restrictions on civil liberties, many of which were included in the Amnesty International quote. The article on human rights in Mauritania also mentions such abuses. I don't really care if the Amnesty International quote is included or not, but I would like to know why the section on human rights should only be a sentence long and only mention slavery. Should the similarly lengthy quote by Human Rights Watch in the lead section of the Turkmenistan article also be removed? The lead sections for other countries such as Belarus, Kazakhstan and Eritrea use multiple sentences to describe poor human rights situations, while others such as China, Equatorial Guinea, Rwanda and Saudi Arabia list different abuses. DeathTrain (talk) 20:16, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
DeathTrain - that’s because the body of the article has established the importance of slavery, but it has yet to do so for other topics of human rights abuses, in my opinion. I believe that there is not enough coverage, in this article, on any particular human rights abuse, except slavery. starship.paint (talk) 00:57, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: I believe that other abuses are necessary to include, but I understand that you believe slavery is especially appropriate. So how about we compromise. Here is my proposal to change the last paragraph of the lead section: Mauritania has been criticized for its poor human rights record, which has included frequent abuses such as torture, arbitrary imprisonment, persecution of government critics and southern-based ethnic groups and notably a continued practice of slavery, despite criminalizing it in 1981 as the last country in the world to do so.
DeathTrain - more needs to be done in the body of the article before adding to the lead. If you can get three reputable organizations (which have an article on Wikipedia) agreeing on each of these, torture, arbitrary imprisonment, persecution of government critics and southern-based ethnic groups, and then add them to the body of the article, then I will consider the case. As you can see, the body of the article clearly presents a case for slavery. Your job is to match that. starship.paint (talk) 08:51, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Here:

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/03/mauritania-slavery-and-discrimination-human-rights-defenders-repressed/

https://unwatch.org/mauritania-set-to-win-seat-on-uns-top-human-rights-body-despite-500000-slaves/

https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2020/country-chapters/mauritania

https://freedomhouse.org/country/mauritania/freedom-world/2019

DeathTrain (talk) 20:47, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: If anything, those abuses I previously mentioned, which are each already mentioned in the article's human rights section. DeathTrain (talk) 21:35, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - they are mentioned, yes, but they are not highlighted like slavery is. Do you see the difference? The Richat Structure is also mentioned. The obesity rate among Mauritanian women is also mentioned. Are they highlights worth putting in the lead? No. So you have to expand those parts, write more about the abuses. starship.paint (talk) 04:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: I think that "marginalization of southern-based ethnic groups" ties into the point about slavery. I am thinking of writing a paragraph in the human rights section, mentioning that "A legacy of Mauritania's post independence history and periods of military rule is a pervasive pattern of authoritarian leadership, which has been characterized by the frequent abuse of human rights to stay in power. Torture and arbitrary imprisonment have been used against government critics and human rights defenders such as Mohamed Cheikh Ould Mkhaitir, a blogger who opposed Mauritania's caste system, marginalization of southern-based ethnic groups, and slavery." I think it may require substantial restructuring of the existing section to avoid redundancy. DeathTrain (talk) 01:04, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Should the HRW quote in the Turkmenistan article be removed?DeathTrain (talk) 18:19, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - sorry, I didn't get your 21 June ping. I think for the Turkmenistan article, that quote in the lead should be changed, because I do not think that it is a fair summary of the body, hence it fails WP:LEAD. As for your comment on 21 June, you are free to change the section. starship.paint (talk) 12:19, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: So how do you think the Turkmenistan article should be modified? I made a few nuances to the slavery part in the lead section of this article. I also would like to know, what modifications to the human rights section would make other examples of human rights abuse justified in the lead section? Do they need subsections like with slavery? DeathTrain (talk) 15:51, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - sorry for the delayed response. You can see how I changed the Turkmenistan article lead. It was pretty clear to me, from the Turkmenistan article and Human rights in Turkmenistan, that the major issues as presented on-wiki would be those three. Whereas I look at the Human rights in Mauritania, and the article is way too long. I can't get a sense of what's the most important issues, and we can't be listing every human rights issue in the lead. So, Do they need subsections like with slavery? in the main Mauritania article - not compulsory but YES PLEASE. starship.paint (talk) 14:10, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: If anything, poor human rights records, especially restrictions on civil liberties are commonplace within authoritarian regimes. For Mauritania, an enduring pattern of authoritarian leadership is a result of the country's recurring periods of military dictatorships. Perhaps it should at least mention that, as well as maybe something about women's rights, which are also problematic in the country. Furthermore, those links I posted above also give lists of abuses that their respective authors saw as worth mentioning. DeathTrain (talk) 23:52, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: lists of abuses are suited for the body, not the lead. The lead is meant to summarize the most important points (which would be the worst abuses). starship.paint (talk) 13:04, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Yeah, but those seem like some of the more prominent or important abuses listed in the Human rights in Mauritania article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeathTrain (talk • contribs)

@DeathTrain: - let's make it clear. What, in your opinion, are the most important abuses in Mauritania? starship.paint (talk) 12:53, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: I can identify at least two kinds:

Historical society-based abuses such as slavery and discrimination against sub-saharan ethnic groups which are results of the caste system, along with problematic rights for women (though they have been improving),

and

Authoritarian leadership-based abuses, such as torture, arbitrary imprisonment, and limits on civil liberties. DeathTrain (talk) 21:59, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

@DeathTrain: - let's see you expand more, on Mauritania, about torture, arbitrary imprisonment, and women's rights. Could you do that? starship.paint (talk) 12:38, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Maybe on the first two as they are part of general authoritarian leadership in the country. But since I have other commitments, I might not be able to do them immediately. DeathTrain (talk) 00:16, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - do what you can, we have no deadlines. starship.paint (talk) 13:08, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Here are the draft paragraphs I have so far that I intend to add into the human rights section:

Aside from abuses regarding its historical caste society, Mauritania’s political instability has also contributed to an enduring pattern of authoritarian leadership, which has further complicated human rights in the country.[citation needed] Violations such as arbitrary imprisonment and torture have been commonplace against government critics and opposition and human rights defenders.[citation needed]

Arbitrary imprisonment has been used to suppress political opposition and human rights defenders accusing the Mauritanian authorities of failing to adequately tackle discrimination and slavery in the country.[citation needed] The arrest of opposition leader and anti-slavery and anti-discrimination activist Ahmedou Ould Wediaa in July 2019 is widely perceived to be a politically motivated effort to suppress dissent by creating a climate of fear and intimidation in the country.[citation needed] Minority Rights Group International has called on the Mauritanian government to release Wediaa and to stop using arbitrary imprisonment to "intimidate, harass and instil fear of reprisals amongst human rights defenders and activists".[1]

Torture was described as "at the heart of the state" by Amnesty International in 2008, and has been used to extract confessions from detainees and also to humiliate and punish prisoners. Torture has become an integral part of the culture of the security forces, who have used it both in official and unofficial places of detention including private residences. Many forms of torture have been practiced by the security forces with complete impunity, including sleep deprivation, cigarette burns, electric shocks, blows in contorted positions, sexual violence and suspension from metal bars in a "jaguar position".[2]

What do you think? DeathTrain (talk) 14:54, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

@DeathTrain: - could you get more citations for the above? From news sources, preferably? reuters.com? apnews.com? starship.paint (talk) 06:58, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: The paragraph on arbitrary imprisonment was based entirely on the source by Minority Rights Group International. Could the Amnesty International source that started this discussion be used as a source? https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/africa/mauritania/report-mauritania/ DeathTrain (talk) 23:28, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - I'm not sure if they are recognized as reliable sources that can be cited for facts without attribution. News sources would be much better. starship.paint (talk) 12:55, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Can I at least add the torture paragraph? DeathTrain (talk) 22:37, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - your content needs to be better attributed. Secondary sources from news organizations are preferable. I think you didn't paraphrase the words enough either. To address this: I have added a paragraph on torture, here. [8] starship.paint (talk) 14:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Would you say it is now appropriate to add torture to the lead section now? DeathTrain (talk) 23:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - I would prefer that we hear from the U.S. state department on the torture. Probably then, we can add "allegations of torture" into the lead. starship.paint (talk) 16:01, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: How's this?

https://photos.state.gov/libraries/mauritania/231771/PDFs/MAUTITANIA-ENG-HR.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20110414012832/http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2010/af/154358.htm DeathTrain (talk) 01:46, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

@DeathTrain: - great find, as in the 2014 executive summary it says: The central human rights problems were the use of torture and other abusive treatment by law enforcement officers, continuing slavery and slavery-related practices, and trafficking in persons. This certainly makes torture prominent. I have added this 2014 report to the body, and torture to the lead. [9] starship.paint (talk) 11:37, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: Ok, so why should it just say that there are allegations of torture, rather than simply stating it outright like with slavery? DeathTrain (talk) 01:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - the reporting on slavery was much stronger. We have the Guardian stating outright: "For all the government’s denials, slavery persists in Mauritania." For torture, we're not assuming everything Amnesty reports is definitely a fact. The U.S. Department of State refers to "reports", "complaints", and "allegations" of torture, not its own investigation. The U.N. says that torture hasn't been investigated. That's why. starship.paint (talk) 03:56, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: The 2014 State department source also gives substantial elaboration on arbitrary imprisonment/arrest. Could it also be used as a source for a paragraph on arbitrary imprisonment in the human rights section? DeathTrain (talk) 15:41, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - that may be too detailed for this article, maybe more suitable in Human rights in Mauritania. Which parts are the most important? We could try searching for news on those parts. starship.paint (talk) 13:00, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Edit Break

@Starship.paint: What do you think of the recent changes to the lead section by user:Caroline1981? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mauritania&type=revision&diff=1010121386&oldid=1009650805 DeathTrain (talk) 22:44, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit Break 2

@Starship.paint: Do you think that this source could be appropriate for adding content on other human rights issues, such as arbitrary imprisonment, women's rights or ethnic discrimination of minorities? DeathTrain (talk) 21:25, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

@DeathTrain: - you didn't link your source. starship.paint (exalt) 01:21, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/186431.pdfDeathTrain (talk) 11:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - the executive summary of this 2011 State Department Report is very similar to that of the 2010 State Department Report which we already quote in this article: According to the US State Department 2010 Human Rights Report,[91] abuses in Mauritania include:... So I think this content is already covered, because the 2011 Report, and our Wikipedia article, does mention: arbitrary arrests ... discrimination against women ... racial and ethnic discrimination. If we want to go into fruther detail, that should be in the Human rights in Mauritania article. starship.paint (exalt) 02:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Could it be possible to paraphrase those sections in the Human rights in Mauritania article in the Human rights section of this article?DeathTrain (talk) 18:19, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - the purpose of the Human rights section of this article is to summarize the (most important) details in the Human rights in Mauritania article. Not exactly paraphrase. starship.paint (exalt) 14:07, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
@Starship.paint: Could it still be possible to summarize those sections? The sections on "National, racial, and ethnic minorities" and "Women" are pretty long. There is also an article on Human trafficking in Mauritania. DeathTrain (talk) 00:19, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
@DeathTrain: - certainly you can try to summarize. starship.paint (exalt) 07:47, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Edit Break 3

@Starship.paint: What do you think of the new edits made to the lead section, which notably remove the mention of torture? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mauritania&type=revision&diff=1040821001&oldid=1038939229--DeathTrain (talk) 21:31, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Mauritania: Authorities must stop using arbitrary arrests to crackdown on anti-slavery and anti-discrimination activists". Minority Rights Group International. 19 July 2019. Retrieved 12 October 2020.
  2. ^ "MAURITANIA: TORTURE AT THE HEART OF THE STATE" (PDF). Amnesty International. 3 December 2008. Retrieved 12 October 2020.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2018 and 22 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Edwardv96.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

NPOV dispute [-Human Rights]

"In 2014, the United States Department of State identified torture by Mauritanian law enforcement as one of the "central human rights problems" in the country.[84] Ironically, Mohamedou Ould Slahi was being held and tortured at Guantanamo Bay detention camp without charge at the time"

This is disputed by the article on Slahi. He was subjected to torture in 2003 under the enhanced interrogation techniques implemented by the Bush administration. Nothing states that he was tortured as late as 2014. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Behold Frostilicus (talk • contribs) 01:02, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:07, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:22, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

There were nine entries in the "External links". Three seems to be an acceptable number and of course, everyone seems to have their favorite to add, sneaking the number to four. The problem is that none is needed for article promotion.
  • ELpoints #3) states: Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
  • LINKFARM states: There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
  • ELMIN: Minimize the number of links. --
  • ELCITE: Do not use {{cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section.
Trimmed excessive links.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:12, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Case of sahara

According to the UN the west Sahara is a disputed territory it is not vandalism but a fact and here is the proof https://www.un.org/dppa/decolonization/en/nsgt tank you Bitton --2001:861:E3C3:7F60:DD6E:FB81:6543:D3FD (talk) 19:43, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

First, that's a poor excuse to inject some political POV into the article (your first edit says everything there is to know about what you want to achieve). Second, the word "disputed" doesn't appear anywhere in that source and besides, Western Sahara has nothing to do with Mauritania (the primary subject). M.Bitton (talk) 20:22, 20 June 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mauritania/Archive_1&oldid=1254962516"