Talk:Sudan/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Typo

Right in the second paragraph: "thereafter procclaimed himself President of Sudan,". It should be "proclaimed." Can someone fix this?

"War has Ended?"

Ah.... under the Darfur Civil War, it says the Janjaweed Militias have disbanded and the war is over.

No, its not, there are still militias and still a lot of killing. Who wrote this?

actually it is over. Long since over. Sudan has developed so mmuch so dont start making up watever you want to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.244.253.109 (talk) 00:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Darfur is still being bombed as we speak. What NCP person rewrote the history of this country? ----

Human Rights

The whole Human rights section is pretty biased. While the Sudanese government does violate various human rights, it is not agreed that they commit genocide and were not found as such by the UN. Torture of priests, concentration camps, etc is wildly beyond imagination, and definitely not happening. It is impossible for the Janjaweed to participate in killing 1.5 million Christians since 1984, as Darfur is a totally Muslim region, even more so than north Sudan.

The paragraph is not verified as well. Not a single citation exists. --Karouri 18:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The entire paragraph seems incredibly biased--no sources cited, either. The UN accelerated the civil war for oil interests? Can this even be proven and even if it can does isn't this paragraph supposed to be on the Sudan's human rights record instead of the influence of other countries in its oil interests? Even if there is a link, it's not spelled out here.

71.196.157.136 06:08, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Alright, I took out the UN stuff because it's both inflamatory and I can't find anything to prove it and replaced it with a couple cursory paragraphs based upon HRW and Amnesty Int'l articles. I didn't touch the last paragraph because I didn't have time to look into it. PLEASE expand this, people.

User:35.638.562.302 March 19, 2007 yeah your paragraph didnt make sense. it sounds like your saying that Muslims wouldnt kill 2 million Christians. that's not true, their whole belief system is based upon their distruction. i dont have any sources to site... but i couldnt just read that and walk away knowing that you were wrong.. ----

The point is that there are no Christians in Darfur, alive or dead. That would be like talking about the US government moving 5 million Hindus out of Arizona. It isn't correct because there are no Hindus (in that number) there, whatever the belief system of the US government is. Karouri (talk) 03:57, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Kinda sad not to mention that US Chevron Oil Company accelerated the war to slaughter and get rid of the people so that they could get their hands on the oil. Nowadays, when US have kinda bad reputation, the oilwells have been sold to Chineese and Malaysian oilcompanies. Worth mention is that the companies doesnt hand out the 2% profit that was supposed to develop the area surrounding the oilwells.

HI Karouri

THERE is an agenda to divide Sudan…The Agenda of breaking up Sudan.. started since British were ruling Sudan.. Christians Evangelists from British and Americans want Sudan to break up

Historically, the north of Sudan had closer ties with Egypt and was predominantly “Arab be Muslims or Christians while the south was predominantly black, with a mixture of Christianity and Animism.

These divisions had been further emphasized by the British policy of ruling the North and South under separate administrations. From 1924, it was illegal for people living above the 10th parallel to go further south and for people below the 8th parallel to go further north

The law was ostensibly Preventing South and North Sudanes people to be enacted ..is to prevent the spread of malaria and other tropical diseases that had ravaged British troops (as british claimed), BUT also to facilitate spreading Christianity among the predominantly animist population [while stopping the Arabic and Islamic influence from advancing south]

British/Christians Evangelists MADE that Division to break up SUDAN ..please ..read … http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudan

To say that Only Christians were Victims of that war (which had tails with the Colonial legacy and still been fed by western nations) is an UNJUST Biased Opinion. Notice also that If Christians minorities in south were killed by Muslims, they would not live and take refuge in Predominantly Muslim populated Khartoum

81.153.68.219 11:38, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

See - North-South and slavery lower in the discussion thread. The seperation of North and South was not merely a residue of colonial policy - although it was encouraged by the anglo-egyptian administration - but a longer trend in the relationship between North and South. And I imagine people were fleeing to Khartoum because they had no money, no livelihoods, and were caught in a violent conflict with both Southern militias attacking each other and Government-supported baqqara and other Northern tribes/militias raiding into the South.

-R2

Warnings

Note: Always remember to substitute user warning templates. For help on user warnings, see the WikiProject on User Warnings.
Older warnings may have been removed, but are still visible in the page history.
[Admin: block | unblock / Info: contribs | page moves | block log | block list]

October 2009

1. warning

   anonymous user from IP address 62.16.180.148 is a persistent vandal who is deliberately including false information in the article on Sudan. Please refrain from posting non factual information.

2. warning

• block

1. warning

Legal system?

There don't seem to be any notes on their legal system - what it is, how it operates, possible penalties, common charges, etc. Even a note on what their system of law is based on, and a link to a more detailed article would be nice. (For example, here's a section on law in Canada: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada#Law - it's a bit stub-ish; but at least it gives a general direction for further research)129.97.250.138 (talk) 18:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Law in Northern Sudan is based on Shari'a, unless things have changed very recently. They also one of the few Islamic countries to enforce the hudud, which means severe corporeal punishment for five different sins (stealing, adultery I think, can't remember the other ones).

Southern Sudan is an autonomous area, with a different legal code. Unfortunately, I know very little about it.

-R2

'Foundation Utilizing Care for Khartoum'

"The United Nations Mission in Sudan (UNMIS) was established under UN Security Council Resolution 1590 of March 24, 2005. Its mandate is to support implementation of the Foundation Utilizing Care for Khartoum (FUCK), and to perform functions relating to humanitarian assistance, and protection and promotion of human rights."

Surely this is just someone being immature? I can't find any evidence of a 'Foundation Utilizing Care for Khartoum', or its dubious acronym. Just wanted to double check before deleting though...

The portion about Darfur Conflict

The portion about the Darfur conflict in the bottom seems opiniated... And not so well organized ... Can we discuss that?

indeed we can - what would you like to discuss? Danlibbo 07:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Also, the Darfur section stated that the Darfurians are mostly Christian or Animist. This is incorrect; the Darfurians are predominantly Muslim.

Also, it would bring value to the text to ad that the Sahara dessert is spreading to the south. This forces people from the north to move south and consequently causes conflicts with the population already living there.

Improvement Drive

The article on Acholi language is currently nominated to be improved on Wikipedia:This week's improvement drive. If you can contribute or want it to be improved, you can vote for this article there.--Fenice 16:42, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Should this article really use the term "Negroid"? I was understanding that that term is inappropriate in all contexts. This word is found in the part "Early history of Sudan".

The article should not use the term "Nigga" in the section "1.2 Christian Kingdoms". Unless I am mistaken, that word is a racial slur, and not used professionally. Acceptable would be Negro or Black African. I'm no expert in anthropology however.

I am doing a report on Sudan. I can't find anything on Sudan child education anywere. Can someone help me out? Thanks.

time question

hey guys i am doing a report on sudan and i was reading time zones and i got stuck. what does UTC mean? can you help me?thx.

UTC is is an acronym for Coordinated Universal Time, which roughly approximates the old Greenwich Mean Time that was given up in 1972. - BanyanTree 00:30, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Timezone

What is the timezone? UTC +2 or +3? The page of Sudan says +2, while the page of Timezone says +3?

UTC +3 (Source: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/)

Brent Woods 19:25, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Shigia

Article needs sources. Kappa 01:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

to be checked

this edit [1] reads

there is one more tribe which is not mentioned and it [Jorshul]which resides in Bahr Al Gazal region.

In the Politics section there was random text thrown in, and I have edited it out. However I think a modifying phrase or set of words may be missing from the desription of the regional governors of the country. The possibly missing words are indicated by a series of fuck that wanking cunt --Smithgrrl 07:21, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Modern History and governments

I tried to correct parts of the page, but so many facts were incorrect. In particular, the paragraph "From 1983 to 1997, the country was divided into five regions in the north and three in the south, each headed by a military governor. After the April 6, 1985 military coup, regional assemblies were suspended. The RCC was abolished in 1996, and the ruling National Islamic Front changed its name to the National Congress Party" does not reconcile with the fact that the government was democratic in 1986-1989, which is explained clearly in History of Sudan, see the part about Sadiq al Mahdi. --Karouri 16:31, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Under History the following sentence reads:

Three ancient tom is the maddest kunt in the world. I have tried to go in and edit this but do not see it listed and therfore believe this text is somehow imbedded or hidden. Can some one please take this out. Let's not be adolescent school kids. If you are not serious about history, or learning, stay out of Wikipedia!! --Brucejr 12:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Also under history is written: "On September 9, 2004 the United States Secretary of State Colin Powell termed the Darfur conflict as a "genocide," because he is an ignorant imperailist pig, acknowledging it as one of the worst humanitarian crises of the 21st century." Italics are my own. KlaftenZhaange 22:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Coat of Arms

Why is the picture of the coat of arms really bad? It seems to be fine when viewed by itself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kadoda (talk • contribs) 09:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

Utterly non-neutral

The sections on the histories of the first and second civil wars are completely subjective and seriously lacking in referencing. For example in the first civil war the government was NOT pushing a Salafist agenda, it was pushing a fairly secular (though still highly ethnocentric) policy based on North Sudanese identity. The language in which the whole section is written is amazingly unencylopedic. I am not going to edit or delete anything because I am not a doctrinaire and I am no expert on the subject (although I do know some about it). I am just drawing your attention to the serious problems with this section. It needs a complete rewrite and more vigorous sources. When you write something on Wikipedia, please try to be mature, neutral, and encyclopedic regardless of your ideology. --Karkaron 01:39, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Merging "Languages of Sudan"?

Strong no. Not sure who suggested it or the rationale. In general I would argue for more development of "Languages of ..." articles for African countries, giving an overview of what languages are spoken,and there are many languages, history, language policy, language and economy, issues with cross-border languages and so on. It's good there is a stub for Sudan. Talk about how to develop it, not delete it. --A12n 12:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

No. Languages of Sudan is a bit of stub right now, but there is more than enough to talk about to occupy a complete article. Geoff NoNick 14:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

arab

When Arab is used,are there any semitic arabs as well in the Sudan?

If they speak Arabic, then of course...--71.235.94.254 04:49, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Plagiarism?

There is a paragraph in the Geography section that is taken word for word from the source listed at the end of the paragraph (citation #29). I'm not sure but I think that's against the rules. Even if it's not, somebody ought to change it to match the style of the rest of the section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Squeoo (talk • contribs) 07:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Teddy bear controversy

You can't possibly tell me this one little bizarre news story is important enough to put in the main article for "Sudan". Let's migrate it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.94.4.104 (talk) 22:27, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It's absurb to include it in this article. There's already a page dealing with the most famous teddy bear in the world so I propose removal of the section altogether. If an event like the US bombing of the "Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory" isn't significant enough to mention in this article then surely the teddy bear controversy doesn't qualify by any stretch of the imagination. Sean.hoyland 02:17, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

It's ongoing and its historical & political significance is too early to judge. If it's not here, more vandals will simply insert anti-Islamic nonsense. I suggest it's left to find its own level, then decisions can be taken as to whether it's worth keeping. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 02:40, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree - its long-term effect is too early to tell. However, it is much more than "one little bizarre news story". It has caused world-wide controversy, stained UK-Sudan relations and caused widespread questioning of issues such as to the extent that religions should take offence over perceived slights to their prophets/symbols. It is rarely right to make early judgements as to whether a current event is transitory or deserving of a long-term record. We should revisit in a few months when we can take a more detached perspective. BlueValour 04:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

If an identical section was added to the Islam page or the United Kingdom page would your position be the same ? Would that be reasonable ? I don't think so. Anyway, I'm happy to watch the article evolve with interest. Sean.hoyland 05:39, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

<---outdent for new discussion
I see this has been replaced, but in the meantime, there is a separate article, which is linked. Is there really any merit having detail beyond the link here? Those of us who watch for vandalism here now have two articles to watch which I think we could do without! --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 19:32, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

At the moment this is of topical importance - I think that we should let things settle down for a short while before deciding on the future of this section. BlueValour (talk) 19:59, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

While I think a "see also" should be more than enough, I have moved the section from "History" to "Human Rights". It is certainly an event that is too minor to be in any history books, but can perhaps be used as a not-very-important example of the current situation of freedom of speech. Kusma (talk) 13:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Whilst I am not convinced it's a "freedom of speech" issue as such (whose freedom?), it seems to me that putting this here in juxtaposition to much more pernicious abuses might been seen as trivialising those issues. I'd propose that now the dust has largely settled, the incident deserves its own article (which it has), with nothing but a link from here. After all, Sudan has a history running into thousands of years, and this incident is just a pinprick in that fabric. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 13:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

OK, I have removed the section. If somebody wants to put it back in, they should find a better section than "History" or "Human rights". Kusma (talk) 13:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Pictures

This page needs some pictures. Take a look at other countries pages, they are full of nice pictures? why there are none here. plz add some. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halmalik (talk • contribs) 07:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Coat of Arms

The Coat of Arms looks funky on Firefox 3 Beta 2! What's up with that? It needs a change... -- ...RuineЯ|Chat... 19:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Version converted to PNG uploaded to commons. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 17:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Land of the blackend

is a more accurate translation of bilad-al sudan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.3.192 (talk) 03:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

I have a friend who has done missions work in Sudan. I asked him about the derivation of the country's name he claims this is an open question. While the referenced derivation is one option, it is also possible that the swampland in souther Sudan named Sudd is a possible root for the country's name.DannyJohansson (talk) 13:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Dubious edits

Are these edits correct, or are they vandalism? Tim Vickers (talk) 19:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

relationship with China and Russia

I removed a statement under the Culture section in the main article that dealt with nuclear relations between Sudan and (China and Russia). Given current political situations, it might be wise to be on the look out for more inappropriate messages of this type. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.97.133 (talk) 19:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Swahili

Many people in the south do not speak Arabic, only Swahili. This was one of the resons for the conflict between the north and south. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.71.75.253 (talk) 15:33, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Wait, what? You mind giving a source on that? As far as I know, the major languages spoken in the South are local, "tribal" languages, like Dinka and Nuer (which are almost identical), Shilluk, Luo, etc... English has some status there as a contact language, and is growing in importance now that Arabic (for obvious reasons) is becoming less desirable as a lingua franca. That said, I am absolutely convinced that swahili, whatever tenuos position it may have in the South, had nothing to do with the onset of the Civil Wars. Although admittedly the role of Arabic as part of the "one nation, one religion, one language" agenda did have its role in the tensions that led to war.

-R2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.184.161.226 (talk) 08:10, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I see your point, but my source is really uncitable because I was told it firsthand by a Sudanese who fled the country. He said almost no one in the South spoke any Arabic or English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.71.75.253 (talk) 01:41, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Swahili is spoken only as a lingua franca by those who lived in Congo, or East Africa, mainly Uganda or Kenya, as refugees. It is a second lingua franca hardly ever heard off the main roads or north of Juba. The first lingua franca, of course is the Southern form of Arabic usually known as Juba Arabic, which is almost exclusively a spoken language but is understood by everyone. This languaged morphed in Kinubi in East Africa when it was taken there by the soldiers of Emin pasha, who eventually, many of them, became soldiers in the King's African rifles in British colonial days. (personally I feel a person who said that Swahili is spoken in S Sudan could not have lived there very much, he probably had to flee as a child)

Why do you people say flee sudan like its a bad place. Like chill yourself. and NO ONE in sudan be it N sudan or S Sudan speaks swahili. there are like 2 languages in sudan english and arabic. and then there are thing we call rutana.. kinda like a language only understood by each tribe. Every tribe has there own way of talking.. not necessarily a languag but you get my point.

Politics section

There is currently a very strange text in the Section Politics on the Sudan main page. It reads: "In December 1999, a power struggle climaxed between President bin Laden and then-speaker of parliament Oghod Aasheet Madrars Al-detaaime, who was the NIF founder and an Islamic ideologue." Obviously, there never was a president of Sudan called Bin Laden, as Omar Bashir took power in 1989 and keeps it until today. And the famous founder of the NIF and big allied and later rival of Bashir is Hassan Turabi, I don't know if there is also a certain al-Detaaime, it could be, but the section should be reviewed by somebody who knows the subject; also the reference to the Twin Tower attack and the transferring of (whom exactly?) to Afghanistan etc. is very strangely worded and not at all logical. Thank you 80.103.32.127 (talk) 11:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Sudanese writers, artists and singers

Current section includes two links and the item "Good GOdddddddd." Does the latter belong?

Mikedelong (talk) 03:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

North-South relations and slavery

There is not one word in this entire article about slavery, and very little about North-South relations outside the sparse mentions in the section about the Civil Wars. It is my understanding (from books like Jok Madut Jok: War and Slavery in the Sudan, 2001 and Francis M. Deng 1995: War of Visions) that the division between north and south had its roots as much, if not more in Northern slave-taking raids and expeditions into the south during and before the Mahdiyya, then in colonial policy during the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium. Slavery dwindled during colonial rule and the early years of independence, but came back in a big way during the Second Civil War. I'm not editing this myself right now because I'm a complete n00b at wikipedia and don't know how to use it elegantly, and just saw that there was a serious shortcoming here. -R2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.134.97.139 (talk) 13:58, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

While there are some faults in your point, the general point is largely correct. The Mahdiyya was a short period, but most of the damage probably took place during the Turkish-Egyptian occupation (what is billed in the page as Union with Egypt!). Slavery was probably even part of the reason in the first place. People in the South tend to lump the Egyptian, Turkish and Northern Sudanese as one group as they are linked by Islam. It didn't help that after some time, Northern Sudanese found it profitable to participate in the business, with some establishing big armies for it. But is was more or less a governmental time for a long period in the Turkish-Egyptian rule. On the other hand, 'came back in a big way' is simply wrong. For example, you would have a lot more asylum cases accepted for such a reason if it were true. With all of the media furore, very few cases of asylum if any have been accepted by Western governments due to slavery. For example, Mende Nazer's case was rejected by the British before being accepted on different grounds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.185.213 (talk) 11:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Hydrology and History

The hydrology section could perhaps mention that one of the main reasons for its low wealth is the need of water for irrigation of crops and to sustain life in the surroundings.

As such, it should be mentioned that the incompletion of the Jonglei diversion canal has contributed to not being able to move forward. And perhaps a suggestion on the connecting of the 2 Wadi's in Darfur (near Malha; notably Wadi Howar and Wadi El Milk could increase economic prosperity and decrease of desertification. This would have much more effect than what the humanitarian organisations are doing.

The egyptians could help in the financial continuation of the projects as they reduce nile evaporation (good for them too).

Also, there together with digging wells and a connection channel east of Malha, heavy population control should be placed, to prevent the population of growing even further.

The history section needs to be moved to seperate page and small section should come in its place.

81.245.188.240 (talk) 17:15, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

State Radio

There is a State Radio song called Sudan. Should this be anywhere in the article?--67.86.119.65 (talk) 23:59, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

"Sudan" vs. "the Sudan"?

Are there any sources dealing with the apparent change in English usage from "the Sudan" to "Sudan"? I'm assuming that "the Sudan" has fallen out of favour and is considered archaic, possibly even colonial — similarly to how, for example, Ukraine used to be (but generally no longer is) called "the Ukraine". This question came to my mind as I was working on the article about Abousfian Abdelrazik‎ — an article which contains several references to "the Sudan", which I believe ought to be changed to just "Sudan", but I'm meeting some resistance over there to this idea. Richwales (talk) 00:01, 9 June 2009 (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) 02:31, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Agree, I think the map should be consistent with other countries. Although I find the new map aesthetically appealing with the added terrain, I am not sure about the projection technicalities.  Nuβiατεch ^Talk/_contrib 11:28, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

11.3 Religion in Sudan

This section was vandalised by an anonymous user from IP address 62.16.180.148. The user wrongly edited the percentages of people belonging to the different religions of Sudan in contravention of the universally recognised figures, which are based on the latest census results of the Sudan. The CIA World Factbook lists the percentages as follows: 70% muslim, 25% animisit and 5% christian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omar1808 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Sudan

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 Sudan'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 "ICC-warrant":

• From National Congress (Sudan): International Criminal Court (4 March 2009). "Warrant of Arrest for Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir" (PDF). (358 KB). Retrieved on 4 March 2009
• From Omar al-Bashir: International Criminal Court (4 March 2009). "Warrant of Arrest for Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir" (PDF). (358 KB). Retrieved on 4 March 2009.

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⚡ 14:55, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Damnit

Whoever you are, stop adding English as an official language. It is not an official language. And perhaps you'd be willing to register an account so I could chat it over with you, but I suspect you'd rather just keep on editing via IP. The Evil Spartan (talk) 02:38, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure whom the IP person is, but I just added it a couple minutes ago after I read, further down in the article, that "according to the 2005 Constitution, Arabic and English are both official languages." What's more, the French, German and Spanish versions of this article also state that English is an official language. Funnyhat (talk) 04:02, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

As a result of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (2005) the Sudanese constitution was changed to recognize Arabic and English as the country's official languages. Karouri (talk) 02:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Dubious

According to paragraph 4 the ICC had already issued an arrest warrant for al-Bashir prior to this date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.248.97 (talk) 19:45, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Sudan under Egypt

the following line to precede the paragraph dealing with the rising of the Mahdi.

In 1820, Sudan came under Egyptian rule when Mehemet Ali, the Ottoman viceroy of Egypt sent armies under his son Ismail Pasha and Mahommed Bey to conquer eastern Sudan.

--Doldrums 10:45, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Ismail, the son of Mehemet Ali who conquered parts of Sudan, is not Ismail Pasha (Ismail the mignificent) who was Mehemet's grandson. Karouri (talk) 03:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

6th fastest growing economy?

Have tagged a sentence bang in the beginning of the first para that claims that Sudan is "still managing to be the sixth fastest growing economy in the world -GDP". Does somebody have a ref for this? Sounds dubious. Prashanthns (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

The CIA World Fact Book lists it as 16th as of 2007, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2003rank.html. The rank figure is not very meaningful. It is a rapidly growing economy, largely due (I suspect) to the increasing oil production. Fitzaubrey (talk) 04:49, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree. Can we just change that to "..is a growing economy owing to the oil production."? Prashanthns (talk) 13:28, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Done. Prashanthns (talk) 08:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Just to mention that it did at some point get up probably to 6th but at least to 8th IIRC according to the Economist. It is quite common lately to have African countries in the top ten, including at some point or another Sudan, Chad, Angola, Ethiopia, Congo among others. The trick is usually discovery of oil and/or stopping of war. In the case of Sudan, it wouldn't seem so strange if we recognize that Sudan's economy changed from 0% oil in 1999 to almost 70% now. Karouri (talk) 04:09, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Religion in Sudan Disputed

The section looks to be undergoing a concerted effort at rewriting facts. It mentions the CIA world book record then disputes it while referring to a reference that gives the same figures. It then goes on to confirm that Christians are the second group which is not supported anywhere, with the sum of the Roman Catholics and the Anglicans alone up to 11 millions which is more than 25% of the whole Sudan population, and is around the top estimate for the population of the whole Southern Sudan. It mentions that "before Egyptian colonisation, the majority or almost all of the population of Sudan were Christians" which is definitely not the case, as before the Egyptian colonisation the whole of north Sudan was largely Muslim and governed by local Muslim governments (for more than three centuries) such as the Kingdom of Sennar and the Fur Kingdom in what is now Darfur. See Islamization of Sudan. In light of this, I am disputing the whole section.

At best, all the "facts" in the disputed section are unreferenced, so all the estimates by various groups are either "citation needed" or "original research". Karouri (talk) 04:53, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

On second reading, it is possible that the estimates provided by the Roman Catholics and the Anglicans are not meant to be of their respective followers but of the whole Christian community in the south, which makes it less preposterous. On the other hand, the assumption that before Egyptian colonisation most of the Sudan were Christians is rubbish. Not only the north was dominated by Muslims as shown above, the South was not accessible to missionaries or in fact any Europeans before the mid 1850s. To be precise, Lake Victoria was first sighted by Europeans in 1858. That is why the majority of the South are animists. Karouri (talk) 17:51, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Government and Politics Update

The last paragraph of the Government and Politics sections describes the "upcoming" Presidential Election, when in fact the election was held some 3 1/2 months ago.--Msl5046 (talk) 13:44, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Just updated it to reflect events up until todayJoberg77 (talk) 22:39, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Sudan is not an arab country

Who ever wrote in the first paragraph that Sudan is the largest 'arab' country by area is a fool.. Arabanized Africans indeed control a lot of the country, but it is in no way an arab country, it's an African country and always has been..Taharqa 18:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Sweety^^ Sudan is an arab country.. whether you like it or NOT! WE SPEAK ARABIC SO WE ARE ARAB.. GET YOUR FACT STRAIGHT.. so egypt is african.. does that mean they are not arab. cuz last time i checked the only language the spoke was ARABIC.. think again sweety then ttalk---> R.O —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.244.253.109 (talk) 00:28, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

All countries in Africa are African and always have been. I do mean black too. However, if Sudan is in a thing called an Arab League, then they recognize them as an arab (whatever that is) country. It was an early memeber.--71.235.94.254 04:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

• Arab and African are not mutually exclusive terms. Africa is a continent, whereas "Arab" ca refer to a hell of a lot of things. Funkynusayri 19:17, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

What is your definition of the term African Taharqa?

Sudan as well as Libya and Egypt are Africans because they are located in Africa same way as China is Asian because it is Located in Asia Not Europe

Do You deny Egypt Libya and Algeria to be African Nations and all have proven continuous history of at least 60000 years old of civilizations, just because They are Not Black?

Africans are diverse in Genetics (Do Not Share the Same Hapologroup DNA to be from common descent), Diverse in languages (NO Common single dominant Language), Diverse in Religion, and do Not have Common single dominant culture and history to be one People or one Race of common descent !

If You Consider yourself as an African , because of your "Blackness". Then many Black Africans (let alone other Africans Barber Tawariq, Libyans, Amazeq..etc) Do NOT THINK your "Blackness" is enough Because, You do Not share with them Religion Language or even how Dark your Colour is. In another word they do NOT see you as an African. So what makes you African or more African than them or more than Arab, Anglo-saxon, Ashkinazi, Han, Homosapien or Even a missing link ape and you are all living in Africa? Is it Just BY BEING BLACK??????

86.151.154.61 (talk) 16:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Osama Bin Laden

I don't understand how Osama Bin Laden is considerded part of the history of Sudan? "In 1991 Osama Bin Laden and the al-queda network moved to Sudan. His money, power and construction work projects assisted the president. In 1996 however, he was forcebly expelled and relocated to afghanistan.".

I concur, this a very western perception of what is relevant, perhaps this would be better suited to a subsection on Terrorism in the foreign relations section. Also valuable to include would be their alleged involvement in the assassination attempt on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia on June 25, 1995 and the bombing of the US embassy. --TuesdayMush 15:18, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Osama Bin Laden has absolutly NOTHING to do with sudan.. NADA. What? Now that you found out Sudan was arab and Muslim you wanna make it look like a terrorist country too. W.O.W. please go write something bout your own country wherever that may be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.244.253.109 (talk) 00:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Demography

Are Sudans arabs like the arabs we see from Jordan and syria, etc. or are they black arabs like somalians? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.108.138.142 (talk) 18:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

Abuse with flag? 86.87.65.51 20:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Somalians are not Arabs since they do not share in Arab culture or speak the language. Sudanese Arabs are actually a mix of Kushite people from the south and regular Arabs. There is a noticeable difference between the two but to the untrained eye it is pretty easy to mix them up. We have a saying in Sudan, "We are the best Arabs because we have African blood but we are the worst Africans because we have Arab blood" I think that saying sums up the sudanese dilemma, torn between two worlds not considered africans nor arabs.

Most of the world seems to consider you African. The funny thing is, they don't seem to point out white arabs as not being true arabs. I guess they don't want to tell white people how those white arabs got there and became arabs(whatever that is).--71.235.94.254 04:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Don't confuse language and culture with genetics. Saying that someone is an Arab usually means that they (or their family or community) speak Arabic and view the culture associated with the Arabic language as their own, in some sense. Arabs are very diverse in their (biological) genetics. There are black Arabs, pale-skinned Arabs, blond and red-headed Arabs. There are black African people who are Arab in their language and culture and those who are not. (And it goes without saying that most Muslims are not Arabs, and not all Arabs are Muslim.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.49.217.85 (talk) 17:47, 14 April 2008 (UTC) BetacommandBot 06:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Historically, the Arabs were not even pale skinned. You can see that in some of the tribes in Saudi Arabia and Yemen today. People in the East Mediterranean probably acquired that skin colour through intermarriage with other races in the area as well as other Mediterranean countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.185.213 (talk) 11:10, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Just cause you are arab doesnt mean you have to be from a white country. Sudanese ppl are arab and they are black. You dont necessarily have to be black by skin to be black. Egyptians, Moraccans, Algerians, Libyan, and Mouritanianss (i might be missing a few) are all africans but they are white.. and they are all ARAB. algeria kinda speaks french mostly but they are still arab...and BLAACK. Just cuz they're white doesnt mean they have more of a right to be arab cuz sudanese are black. The whole entire middle east are arab and african arabs are part of it.. search up ARAB COUNTRIES and you'll be surprised.. Somalis are NOT arab cuz they dont speak it.. Your arab if your mother tongue is arabic.. anyway ppl need to get their facts straight. dont act like a geographer when you dunno nothing bout some countries... just saying (99.244.253.109 (talk) 23:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC))

Border with Egypt

Whey does Sudan's border with Egypt have bends in it rather than being straight?

Tabletop (talk) 09:02, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

iT DOESNT NECESSASRILY HAVE TO BE STRAIGHT?? its just a border —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.244.253.109 (talk) 00:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Most borders are NOT straight, because they follow natural divisors such as mountains or waterways. The fact that Africa has many straight borders is a colonial artifact, and held by many historians to have been done on purpose to both separate individual populations among 2 or more countries, and to constrain to single countries multiple populations that were shown to be hostile to each other (i.e. divide and conquer). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.107.12.148 (talk) 00:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Hello any administrator watching this article

This article should be semi-protected as the page is becoming the target of vandals and sorry,i tried to help but almost messed the page up since my reverting tools did not work on the page (check the history),thanks.Earlymen (talk) 10:34,21 March 2011 (UTC)

please allow me to put new section of NGOs on this article....I'm Student at Syracuse University New York, and my professor instructed me to do some work here. Moreover, I'm from Sudan myself. Please let me know Mashar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masharmakuir (talk • contribs) 13:38, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Types of NGOs Sudan: Most of the NGOs operating in Sudan are UN agents such as World Food Program (WFP); Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation (FAO) ; the United Nations Development Program (UNDP); the United Nations Industrial Development Organizations (UNIDO); the United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF); United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR); the United Nations Mine Service (UNMAS); the International Organization for Migration (IOM); and the United Nations office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masharmakuir (talk • contribs) 02:31, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

vandalism

The page has been again.--01:06, 22 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samusaran253 (talk • contribs)

current events

Hello!? THere's absolutely NOTHING in here about the genocide occuring in Darfur! This article needs attention...unfortnately I don't have the time to fix it now, but I'm hoping someone will. I added a link to darfur conflict.

I agree with the above comment. This really needs to be remedied.

What is the timezone? UTC +2 or +3? The page of Sudan says +2, while the page of Timezone says +3?

>>Clearly theres a section called 'TIMEZONES' for people to talk in —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.244.253.109 (talk) 23:12, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

i also agree im doing a report on sudan and i cant get and info what so ever —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.234.218.156 (talk) 17:19, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Osama Bin Laden presence is definitely part of sudan's history. Not that he is muslim and so is sudan but because the nation was at one point considered the most dangerous nation for producing terrorists. That is a reason why and a worthwhile part of this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.81.46.51 (talk) 01:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Sudanese Arabs are "Arabs" like Egyptians

"As with Egyptians and most other non-Arabian Peninsula Arabs, most Sudanese Arabs are "Arabs" in linguistic and cultural association."

Is this really stating that Egyptian people are not actually ethnic Arabs, but are "culturally Arab" as a result of "Arabization"? Because, while that is true of Sudanese, I don't think that's true of Egyptians. What is their real ethnicity? Is this trying to imply that most Egyptians are the descendants of Ancient Egyptians, and only are Arab because of culture? 96.26.213.146 (talk) 09:43, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Egyptians, like Libyans, Algerians, Tunisians, Moroccans, Syrians and Lebanese people are majorly Arabs in cultural, linguistic and somehow genetic sense but are not clearly ethnic Arabs like those of the peninsula. Indigenous populations of Egypt, like Ancient Egyptian descendants, Nubians, Berbers...etc have mixed with Arab populations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecad93 (talk • contribs) 12:06, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

In the case of Egypt, it really is the case that there is probably very little contribution to their DNA due to the incursion of Arabs in the 600s. They adopted the religion and the language, but the population of Egypt was very dense, and the invaders were not that many, so Egyptians today are mainly descended from their ancient counterparts (there may however be considerable contribution from repeated Ancient invasions of Egypt by Semitic peoples). In the rest of North Africa, Arabs intermixed with the local populations (Berbers as well as descendants of Punic and Roman settlers, esp in Tunisia) to varying degrees based on area. By the point of Morocco, as the genetic tests show, the Arab contribution is negligible- most Moroccan Arabs have mainly Berber DNA. --Yalens (talk) 21:17, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Need for protection

This page needs to be fully protected as it needs big revision on July 9, 2011 when the South Sudan republic is declared. This should not be left to inexperienced or anonymous editors for at least a while (say 2 months)... Almost all the maps appearing here should be revised as well... So a big task... Plus all the best wishes in advance to all those editor colleagues who will engage in a big revision of the page. werldwayd (talk) 18:30, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Article protection

Considering the current political climate in Sudan (elections, splitting up of the country) I suggest that this article be protected.Darqcyde (talk) 21:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, especially if after announcement of the results, but before actual split happening it gets edited as if it already happened. See here.

Also, I would suggest that after the eventual split we should have two articles - historical for Sudan pre-2011-split (with statistics for North+South) and regular for Sudan after-2011-split. Alinor (talk) 07:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

This would be a great approach to keep a "historical Sudan" perspective after separation. werldwayd (talk) 18:33, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Population

Seems to me the thing to do would be to use the 2008 census number (I know it's disputed), subtract the population of South Sudan, and list that. Better than pulling a number out of thin air. -Kudzu1 (talk) 00:04, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

New Sudanese maps....

Although South Sudan has been cut off from some maps it still reflects it because the maps are too long. The maps should change to represent only the Republic of the Sudan without the south. --Ecad93 (talk) 08:44, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Hala'ib triangle should be colored

see File talk:Political Regions of Sudan, July 2010.svg.--ZealousGnome (talk) 09:42, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Name question

Just a query regarding the name of the country: assuming that South Sudan secedes as planned now will the north carry on using the name "Sudan" or will it change to "North Sudan" or another name? 94.197.212.226 (talk) 00:09, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Although it will be confusing, they will fairly certainly keep the same name. At least, there has been no evidence otherwise. Zazaban (talk) 21:19, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Using the terms "South Sudan" for the south and "Republic of Sudan" for the north could help in this situation. But major changes will be needed to this page when southern independence is acheived Dn9ahx (talk) 21:28, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Ahhh, I see. Thanks for your help. I suppose "North Sudan" will probably be used colloquially to differentiate but time will tell. 94.197.212.63 (talk) 01:39, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Sudan now is two countries [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.30.5.109 (talk) 14:00, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

• not yet - from the same bbc source = "The formal declaration of independence will be made on 9 July 2011" Dn9ahx (talk) 15:25, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Well thank you for the correction pal :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.30.5.109 (talk) 18:46, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

It's worth noting that neither the Republic of Korea nor the Democratic People's Republic of Korea contain geographic indicators in their constitutional names. Nor did the Republic of Vietnam or the Democratic Republic of Vietnam. I think it's reasonably likely that the WP:COMMON name for Sudan will become North Sudan, particularly based on statements by Southern Sudanese officials, international diplomats, and aid agency workers quoted in the media - but that's speculative (and inaccurate until South Sudan gains independence). I expect we'll be revisiting this discussion in the near future. -Kudzu1 (talk) 05:04, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I was previously an IP editor on South Sudan in particular and I just saw this move to add in "and sometimes colloquially known as North Sudan" in the very frist sentence. This is absolute speculation. Greater Sudan has been partitioned for just a week.......Much longer and widespread usage will be necessary before we can assert this. Also, it would have to be extremely common usage before it could be put in the first sentence. This is speculation. And putting it in the first sentence is absolutely inapt. It is also without justification - Examples:

• Virginia is generally not called or even often called "East Virginia" even though there is a West Virginia);
• Ireland is generally not called Southern Ireland even though there is a Northern Ireland;
• Mongolia generally not called or even often called Outer Mongolia even though there is an Inner Mongolia;
• Samoa is generally not called (any more) Western Samoa even though there is an American Samoa.

There are other examples too. The references to Korea and Vietnam are seriously not thought out: These are divided countries, each side pledged to retake the other. So both claim to be the true Korea or Vietnam....But here is different. Sudan was the first country in the world to recognise South Sudan as a separate sovereign state. The notion that they will always be called "North Sudan" and "South Sudan" is not thought out, is far too early an assertion and the Government of Sudan upholds its own name. NelsonSudan (talk) 15:50, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Post July 9 2011 infobox and intro

---I have placed a copy of the info box here so that we can work together to edit it ready to be used from July 9 --- I need help with GDP, HDI, FSI etc --- I have calculated area and population by deducting southern population and area from the total area and population of the sudan infobox --- I have changed order of ethnic hroups and removed percentages --- I have added a PNG map based on the South Sudan map but with the colours changed ---

I've removed English from 'official languages', since the sudanese govt has decided it would only keep Arabic after the split. Moemin05 (talk) 07:06, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

جمهورية السودان Jumhūrīyat al Sūdān Republic of the Sudan
Flag
Motto: النصر لنا  (in Arabic) "Victory is Ours"
Anthem: نحن جند لله جند الوطن  (in Arabic) We are the army of God and of our land
Capital	Khartoum 15°37.983′N 32°31.983′E
Largest city	Omdurman
Official languages	Arabic
Ethnic groups	Arab, Black, Beja, foreigners, other
Demonym(s)	Sudanese
Government	Federal presidential democratic republic
• President	Omar al-Bashir (NCP)
• Vice President	Ali Osman Taha (NCP)
Legislature	National Legislature
• Upper house	Council of States
• Lower house	National Assembly
Establishment
• Kingdoms of Nubia	2000 BC
• Sennar dynasty	1504
• Unification with Egypt	1821
• Independence from Egypt, and the United Kingdom	1 January 1956
• Secession of Southern Sudan	9 July 2011
Area
• Total	1,888,584 km2 (729,186 sq mi)
Population
• 2009 estimate	35,679,108
• Density	18.9/km2 (49.0/sq mi)
GDP (PPP)	2010 estimate
• Total	$98.926 billion (pre-southern independence)
• Per capita	$2,464.901 (pre-southern independence)
GDP (nominal)	2010 estimate
• Total	$65.742 billion (pre-southern independence)
• Per capita	$1,638.065 (pre-southern independence)
HDI (2007)	0.531 low
Currency	Sudanese pound (SDG)
Time zone	UTC+3 (East Africa Time)
• Summer (DST)	UTC+3 (Not observed)
Date format	dd/mm/yyyy
Drives on	right
Calling code	249
ISO 3166 code	SD
Internet TLD	.sd

The Republic of Sudan, /suːˈdæn/ Arabic: جمهورية السودان Jumhūrīyat al Sūdān, is a country in northeastern Africa. It is bordered by Egypt to the north, the Red Sea to the northeast, Eritrea and Ethiopia to the east, South Sudan to the south, the Central African Republic to the southwest, Chad to the west and Libya to the northwest. The world's longest river, the Nile, divides the country between east and west sides. Its capital is Khartoum, which serves as the political, cultural and commercial centre of the nation, while Omdurman is the largest city.

A member of the United Nations, Sudan also maintains membership with the African Union, the Arab League, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference and the Non-Aligned Movement, as well as serving as an observer in World Trade Organization.

The people of Sudan have a long history extending from antiquity which is intertwined with the history of Egypt, with which it was united politically over several periods. After gaining independence from Egypt and the United Kingdom in 1956, Sudan suffered seventeen years of civil war during the First Sudanese Civil War (1955–1972) followed by ethnic, religious and economic conflicts between the Northern Sudanese (with Arab and Nubian roots), and the Christian and animist Nilotes of Southern Sudan. This led to the Second Sudanese Civil War in 1983, and because of continuing political and military struggles, Sudan was seized in a bloodless coup d'état by colonel Omar al-Bashir in 1989, who thereafter proclaimed himself President of Sudan. The civil war ended with the signing of a Comprehensive Peace Agreement which granted autonomy to the southern region of the country. Following a referendum held in January 2011, Southern Sudan seceded in July 2011.

Officially a federal presidential representative democratic republic, the politics of Sudan are widely considered by the international community to take place within an authoritarian dictatorship due to the influence of the NCP. These factors led to the termination of diplomatic relations between Sudan and Chad, obstructed humanitarian assistance to the civilian population and has even led to war crimes charges being issued against members of the Sudanese government.

On 4 March 2008, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for al-Bashir on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity related to the ongoing conflict in the Darfur region of western Sudan., the first sitting head of state ever indicted by the ICC. And on 12 July 2010, the ICC issued a second arrest warrant for al-Bashir, adding the charge of genocide.

On 7 February 2011, the people of Sudan voted whether to keep it as one country, or to split it into two. It was later announced that Sudan will be split into North Sudan and South Sudan on 9 July 2011. This caused Sudan to lose its title as the largest country in Africa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hektossus (talk • contribs) 00:00, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

References

Name

Should the name of this page be changed to North Sudan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.113.134 (talk) 15:41, 21 July 2011

Being discussed under Talk:Sudan#New_Title 90.142.144.88 (talk) 15:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

New Title

Since South Sudan is an official country, the main article should be retitled "North Sudan". Thank You. 76.245.98.40 (talk) 02:58, 9 July 2011 (UTC)SomeConcernedCitizen

No, it should not. The country is called "(Republic of) Sudan", not "North Sudan" - unless there is substantial evidence that North Sudan is a term commonly used for that country* there is no basis for using it, let alone making it the article's title.

Currently, the article has one single article from a British tabloid that merely uses the term colloquially. That is not even enough for the current claim that the country is "also known as North Sudan". That is why I added a citation needed tag.

Str1977 ^(talk) 06:55, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

You can do a Google search for the term yourself if you want to see how widely it's used. I'm not going to cite every article on the internet that mentions it; the citation there is meant to be representative. As for an article move, I think that would be original research, as while North Sudan is used enough to be worth mentioning, it's not the common name for the country. That may change, but it's not our job to be a crystal ball. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

No, I will not do a Google serach for the term. It is the job of the one including something to provide proper documentation. A lone article in a tabloid that is actually concerned with "South Sudan" is not enough. If we are not a crystal ball, then why should we include "North Sudan" only hours after the term could possibly make sense. Str1977 ^(talk) 09:22, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I think it's pretty likely that the remainder of Sudan will be started to be called "North Sudan" soon. After all, the Republic of Korea is also referred to as "South Korea" for some reason. ;-) It can't hurt to wait a little bit until people actually begin calling the country North Sudan though. - HCM, 9 July 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.225.47.239 (talk) 17:24, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm not so sure. There's no East Virginia, Southern Ireland or Eastern Samoa. And the Congos are/were never referred to as East and West Congo, despite having easily confusable names. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 18:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

If you do a google news search for "North Sudan", you'll see the term is already being used a lot, including by major news organizations like Reuters. There's no telling yet if it'll become THE main term for the country of course. (Also there was a Southern Ireland.) Orange Tuesday (talk) 12:55, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

I added this above too. I was previously an IP editor on South Sudan in particular and I just saw this move to add in "and sometimes colloquially known as North Sudan" in the very frist sentence. This is absolute speculation. Greater Sudan has been partitioned for just a week.......Much longer and widespread usage will be necessary before we can assert this. Also, it would have to be extremely common usage before it could be put in the first sentence. This is speculation. And putting it in the first sentence is absolutely inapt. It is also without justification - Examples:

• Virginia is generally not called or even often called "East Virginia" even though there is a West Virginia);
• Ireland is generally not called Southern Ireland even though there is a Northern Ireland;
• Mongolia generally not called or even often called Outer Mongolia even though there is an Inner Mongolia;
• Samoa is generally not called (any more) Western Samoa even though there is an American Samoa.

There are other examples too. The references to Korea and Vietnam are seriously not thought out: These are divided countries, each side pledged to retake the other. So both claim to be the true Korea or Vietnam....But here is different. Sudan was the first country in the world to recognise South Sudan as a separate sovereign state. The notion that they will always be called "North Sudan" and "South Sudan" is not thought out, is far too early an assertion and the Government of Sudan upholds its own name. NelsonSudan (talk) 15:50, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

How about Yemen then? The two Yemens weren't a divided country, they didn't pledge to retake one another (in fact they had friendly relations), and North Yemen came in to being decades before South Yemen, but they were still called North and South Yemen. There's no real hard and fast rule about when a country gets this kind of disambiguation and when it doesn't, so we have to base our decisions on outside sources. Moving the page to "North Sudan" would obviously be inappropriate but this country is clearly called "North Sudan" sometimes, and this fact is easy to cite: [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] Orange Tuesday (talk) 15:10, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea what your Yemen article shows...There is no political wish to reunify Sudan; the Sudan was the first state to recognise South Sudan. Much longer and frequent use will need to be made before the term "North Sudan" should be given any prominence on the article. You are crystal ball gazing. NelsonSudan (talk) 06:08, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

No, I'm describing current usage. As of right now, 19 July 2011, a variety of reliable English language sources use the term "North Sudan" to refer to this country. I've cited that usage above. Orange Tuesday (talk) 13:20, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

You need to achieve a consensus for any change; the reasons against the change have been set out. You can't ignore that there is no consensus for your change. NelsonSudan (talk) 10:58, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

As with the name dispute on South Sudan, though, your main objection seems to be WP:IDONTLIKEIT. It seems no number of secondary sources, as with the name of South Sudan, is enough to satisfy you. Orange Tuesday has brought forward a plethora of WP:RS that use the colloquial "North Sudan" as a proper noun, and your response was basically "well, it hasn't been long enough for those sources to count". Don't recall seeing anything about that in Wikipedia policy. -Kudzu1 (talk) 11:05, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Kudzu1 - Please have respect and assume good faith. Please note that I am not the only editor who has rejected this change (see above from User: Str1977; User: /Coffeeshivers). You need to have a consensus for a change like this. I would like to clarify that I have no problem with a new section being added into the Article where the variuos names (historic and colloquial etc) for the Sudan could be explored. This could absolutely refer to the term "North Sudan" and it could even specuate about whether "North Sudan" will become a common name. However, at the moment, not enough time has passed to assess whether Sudan will become commonly known as North Sudan; As editors have mentioned - more likely than not it won't become known by that term. It would be wrong this single ONE (of several) colloquial term for the Sudan and include it in the very first sentence. Finally, you referred to my contributions on the question of the name of South Sudan...That is a topic for the other page...but suffice to say, it was not a question of me not liking anything; it was a question of what the Constitution of that country says (Art. 1). It is unfair of you to suggest otherwise. NelsonSudan (talk) 16:46, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

North Sudan is a name that is currently being used. You haven't argued otherwise. In fact, I'd argue that what you are doing is crystal ball gazing because you're assuming that even if it is used now, it won't be used in the future, therefore it should not be included. As with the South Sudan issue, Wikipedia doesn't work the way you want it to on these issues. In my view, policy is quite clear that Wikipedia should reflect the facts as they exist presently rather than trying to predict what they will be in future. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:36, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Re. "North Sudan" is a name that is currently being used." (1) Several other terms are also currently being used. Ask any Sudanese editor about that; there is insufficient basis to single out this one colloquial term above the others; (2) Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia, not an online journal - what is in use on a particular day is not determinative because it means so little and prooves nothing; the longer term must be taken into account. So, of course, it is hardly surprising that in the very month that "South Sudan" became independent, Press Reporters, writing for an audience around the world, in many cases an audience that does not even know where Sudan is...used the term "North Sudan". Press reports centred on one particular matter do not tell us whether Sudan is particularly commonly known as North Sudan; (3) there are other reasons apparent from the above discussion including where we explained that Samoa is not Western Samoa, Virginia is not East Virginia, Mongolia is not Outer Mongolia, Luxembourg is not South Luxembourg, Ireland is not Southern Ireland....You are trying to "put the cart before the horse" - trying to assert as a fact that North Sudan is the common name for Sudan before time has had a chance to determine whether or not that is correct - that is CrystalBallGazing etc; (4) you have ignored my suggestion of a compromise about including a section dealing with the various names by which Sudan is often known; and (5) you need a consensus for your change and several editors have disagreed with your change. NelsonSudan (talk) 08:14, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

We're not saying "North Sudan" is THE common name for Sudan, we're saying it's A common name for Sudan. I don't want to privilege it above "Sudan" or "Republic of Sudan", I don't want to move the page anywhere, I don't want to change any infoboxes, and I don't want to use it as the main term on this page. All I want to do is add five words to the start of the article indicating that some sources use the phrase "North Sudan" to refer to the country, which is an undeniably true factual statement. Also, you don't need to have a consensus to add a reliably sourced factual sentence to an article. That's just the default way that content is supposed to be added to Wikipedia, and any editor is allowed to do it at any time. Orange Tuesday (talk) 16:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

I know perfectly well what you want. In the very first sentence of the article, you want to add that the country is also known as "North Sudan". For the reasons set out above, I cannot support this premature change which singles out one (of several) unofficial colloquial terms that Sudan is known by. Like I also said, I would welcome a new section in the article where the names, official and unofficial, were discussed. Singling out "North Sudan" in the lede sentence is not apt. and the change does not command consensus support. NelsonSudan (talk) 18:33, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Maybe you'd like to identify for us which other widely-used colloquial terms you say Sudan is known by to include in this section you propose? -Kudzu1 (talk) 18:42, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

"The Sudan" is one. Even if there were no others. The point remains the same. We would not suggest you if you wanted to add in reference to "Outer Mongolia" in the Mongolia article or "Southern Ireland" in the Republic of Ireland article etc. We don't think adding in "North Sudan" into the lede sentence is apt. NelsonSudan (talk) 18:45, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

No, the point doesn't remain the same, and who is the "we" here? You've been the only person arguing against inclusion since two days after South Sudan gained independence.

Two colloquialisms (and since "the Sudan" is part of the country's official name verbatim, I'm not sure it qualifies) does not an entire new section of the article make. Many reliable sources are using "North Sudan" to refer to this country; that should be noted in the article, and the place where that's done per Wikipedia custom is the intro paragraph. -Kudzu1 (talk) 18:57, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

The points are well made above. Who are "We"? Well, those opposed to the change including me, User Str1977 and User /Coffeeshivers for starters. You and Orange Tuesday are the ones pushing for a change. If you want to foist the words "North Sudan" into the article's lede, you need to achieve a consensus for the change. I think there is little more I can add. As I say, the points have been well made. NelsonSudan (talk) 20:55, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Str1977 hasn't been active on this Talk page in 20 days. Coffeeshivers never explicitly outlined opposition, simply contributed a point, and hasn't been active on this Talk page in 18 days. Per WP:CONSENSUS, you are the only person holding up consensus, and it seems an awful lot like your basis for not wanting North Sudan to be included is that you just don't like it. And that's not a valid reason to block consensus. Modern usage of "Outer Mongolia" and "Southern Ireland" is so rare as to not compare to "North Sudan"; one is used and the others are not, except for historically. You have not addressed the various sources using "North Sudan", and it kind of seems like you just don't like the term and therefore don't want it to be included in the lede. -Kudzu1 (talk) 21:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

The editors you refer to were both against your proposed addition. An editor does not need to log in every day to restate something he or she has already said. You are the one proposing a change and you have failed to build a consensus. NelsonSudan (talk) 07:41, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

First, while posting every day isn't a requirement, policy is quite clear that if editors on a Talk page stop participating, they are no longer active in that dispute - therefore you are the only person holding up consensus. Second, I'd honestly be fine with that as an editor, having been in that position myself, except for the fact that you're not really responding to OT and I as much you are repeating the same exaggerations and false equivalencies over and over again, ignoring all evidence or challenges to your oft-repeated claims. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, there's certainly consensus enough for something as simple and straightforward as this. Jonathunder (talk) 14:11, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Kudzu1, You are trying to disregard the voices of editors who have put their position on the record....That's hardly democractic. A change requires a consensus....If you want to demonstrate a consensus, you need to show the consensus is for change. So far you haven't done that....And trying to pretend that other editors have not rejected your change strikes me as simply wrong. 00:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NelsonSudan (talk • contribs)

I didn't invent the policy. Please review WP:CONSENSUS. And BTW, you can respond to me directly instead of responding to editors who agree with me. -Kudzu1 (talk) 00:27, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

The name “North Sudan” is not an official name. If it is encountered as a colloquial name, it could be mention in the “Name” section, if such created. The mention of this name in the first sentences of this article is unnecessary. Aotearoa (talk) 06:01, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

North Korea isn't an official name either. Nor is Taiwan in reference to the ROC. -Kudzu1 (talk) 06:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

But names such „North Korea”, „Taiwan” are officially used (by governments, by international organizations, by encyclopedias, etc.) and name “North Sudan” is only colloquial named not used officially, like the name “Eastern Samoa” for American Samoa. Aotearoa (talk) 11:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

The guidelines expressed in WP:PRIMARY suggest the distinction is irrelevant for the purposes of Wikipedia. I don't see a whole lot of reliable sources calling American Samoa anything else (and if a bunch of them consistently did, I would support mentioning it in the lede of that article), but a lot of media organizations seem to be using "North Sudan" as standard practice since secession. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:44, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Kudzu1, I don't know why you are pushing and pushing for this "North Sudan" change. It is not appropriate and the change does not command consensus support. I fully agree with Aotearoa and others who have also explained, patiently, why this change is inappropriate. Can this discussion be ended or are you going to persist in pushing for this change? I am not likely to be online much for a week or two, but my views and those of others are already well set out above. We can't support the change you are pushing for. I would welcome a names section though where the topic could be explored in the article provided it was not OR etc. Your reference to "since secession" is, in my opinion, pretty silly too....its been less than one month since secession! That is not long enough to show that any term is a new common name. I am going over old ground again....The arguments have already been well set out. NelsonSudan (talk) 23:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be the official name of the country formerly called Sudan, to call it North Sudan. It's like the 2 Koreas. Officially what we call North Korea is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and what we call South Korea is offically the Republic of Korea. It's the same with East Germany (German Democratic Republic) and West Germany (Federal Republic of Germany). The two nations should be referred to as North Sudan and South Sudan, and the article now called Sudan should be titled North Sudan, while also noting the official name of the nation in the article. NapoleonX (talk) 04:53, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I would like to state my support for keeping the title of this article as simply Sudan. I do not agree with the arguments of User:Kudzu1, and do not see sufficient evidence that the term North Sudan is in common use. Irregulargalaxies (talk) 21:43, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

The "North Korea" analogy doesn't work for me. The USG/State Dept calls the DPRK "North Korea," as do many Americans, so "North Korea" makes sense. However, the USG/State Dept uses "Sudan" and "South Sudan," and there is otherwise no use in the media or elsewhere of "North Sudan" (that I have ever heard). I think it should stay as is. Gumboz1953 (talk) 14:12, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Agree with Irregulargalaxies and Gumboz and the several others who have rejected the change. There is no consensus for it and it makes no sense..........Another example of how silly the proposed change is is that of Guinea, Guinea-Bissau...No one calls the former East Guinea and the latter West Guinea etc! There is no reason Sudan and South Sudan should be treated differently. They are are separate countries now. NelsonSudan (talk) 08:30, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

File:Sudan 2010 population density3.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Sudan 2010 population density3.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 15:52, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

The map of Sudan

Could anyone please provide a new map for Sudan, reflecting the secession of South Sudan, by July 13, 2011?
Please provide the SVG and PNG files of it.

NJKFalcon (talk) 10:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Already done encase anyone wondered. --Nutthida (talk) 23:15, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Protests

In light of the 2011 Sudanese protests article, we should include a reference to that article somewhere in this article or the history article. -- 92.4.60.133 (talk) 19:32, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism

User 93.219.33.217 used this page for some random and incoherent gibberish. Wasn't up for long - I rolled it back, and manually deleted a bit they'd initially added at the bottom. Haven't checked the whole article, so someone ought to make sure it's all right, or just roll it back further. I'm not logged in because I'm at work and shouldn't be on here, but was checking some facts from a rambling conversation about Muslim countries :)

81.98.44.3 (talk) 15:42, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

The people's uprisings have been completely removed, the same way the NCP has removed these revolutions from the history curriculum in schools. They're trying to rewrite the history.68.175.84.188 (talk) 04:41, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://wysinger.homestead.com/keita-1993.pdf

  Triggered by \bwysinger\.homestead\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 15:35, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Tourism in Sudan

Hi! It would be great if you could create this article: Tourism in Sudan!

Perhaps you can draw some inspiration from Tourism in Brazil and Tourism in Germany. :) Use proper sources! Thanks & all the best, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 23:03, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Religious Persecution & Apostasy Death Penalty

Given the recent case of Meriam Yehya Ibrahim Ishag, and her story appearing in global media, its possible this issue is going to become significant. It is appropriate to add a section on the religious persecution of other faiths in this predominantly Muslim country? Citable sources: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-27424064 or http://www.aljazeera.com/news/africa/2014/05/sudan-woman-faces-death-penalty-apostasy-201451455639303457.html or http://www.ibtimes.com/pregnant-married-sudanese-christian-sentenced-death-denouncing-her-fathers-islamic-faith-1584719 or http://www.catholic.org/news/international/africa/story.php?id=55428 or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4jU4YBxEmg or http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/world/africa/article4090787.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_05_15 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.157.192.242 (talk) 22:26, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

About the map

Seems to lack an Eritrea-Ethiopia border.

Music sampler

There was a "music sampler" - the relevant article was redirected here.—Preceding unsigned comment added by MyRedDice (talk • contribs) on 26 April 2003

Map

There is a good map in the de-Wikipedia waiting :-) 82.83.18.196 21:20, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Sudan was not "Islamicized" in the 7th Century

The second paragraph on this page reads: "By virtue of its proximity to Egypt, the Sudan participated in the wider history of the Near East inasmuch as it was Christianized by the 6th century, and Islamized in the 7th."

The Nubia region was ruled by Christian kings throughout the medieval period, a state of affairs made permanent by the Baqt treaty. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baqt

This sentence should be edited to reflect that, but I'm not savvy enough with Wikipedia to feel confident that my correction will be retained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BCD9:6600:8C14:D3A:3729:C5CD (talk) 03:07, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

• Agreed, I've changed it to the 15th - SimonP (talk) 21:09, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 19 September 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 00:36, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

---

(non-admin closure)

• Sudan → Republic of the Sudan
• Sudan (disambiguation) → Sudan

– No WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. "Sudan" can mean different things including a region and South Sudan. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 20:56, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose BMK (talk) 23:44, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Sudan. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120310183842/http://www.iom.int/jahia/Jahia/activities/africa-and-middle-east/east-africa/sudan/cache/offonce/ to http://www.iom.int/jahia/Jahia/activities/africa-and-middle-east/east-africa/sudan/cache/offonce/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130528183621/http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/acdi-cida/ACDI-CIDA.nsf/eng/JUD-217124359-NT2 to http://www.acdi-cida.gc.ca/acdi-cida/ACDI-CIDA.nsf/Eng/JUD-217124359-NT2
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150405024841/http://www.irinnews.org/report/25987/sudan-csi-highlights-slavery-and-manifestations-of-racism to http://www.irinnews.org/Report/25987/SUDAN-CSI-highlights-slavery-and-manifestations-of-racism
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140103002212/https://data.undp.org/dataset/MPI-Population-living-below-1-25-PPP-per-day-/ehe9-pgud to https://data.undp.org/dataset/MPI-Population-living-below-1-25-PPP-per-day-/ehe9-pgud
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141019224639/http://www.refugees.org/resources/refugee-warehousing/archived-world-refugee-surveys/2008-world-refugee-survey.html to http://www.refugees.org/resources/refugee-warehousing/archived-world-refugee-surveys/2008-world-refugee-survey.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120605132439/http://www.sd.undp.org/sudan%20overview.htm to http://www.sd.undp.org/sudan%20overview.htm

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:03, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Arab Propaganda

I noticed that before Sudan was split, it was always called an AFRICAN nation and NOT categorized as North African or middle-eastern and in a so-called region called 'sub-Saharan' Africa. After the split, people use the term Arab loosely, and easily call it North Africa, while African nations to it's west are not called Arab nations - even Mauritania, who is in the Arab League. You cannot tell me this was not political, as well as the Sudans splitting to make all of this possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.211.201.227 (talk) 23:42, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Sudan article now about Kim Jong-un?

Looks like there was a big copy / paste mistake somewhere, and now the Sudan article is a carbon copy of the Kim Jong-un article.

Just thought I'd point it out in the hope that more knowledgeable Wikipedia people than myself are able to go back to restore the original article, instead of the whole community having to start it again from scratch.

Will also contact Wikipedia directly about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mfolkerson (talk • contribs) 12:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

It was vandalism from an unregistered editor, and has now been reverted. IgnorantArmies (talk) 12:56, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Khartoum

Khartoum is a much larger city than Omdurman. It even contradicts itself in the own article! See here. Yours Truly (talk) 12:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Sudan vs the Sudan

Which form should be used? The article notes that the official form is the latter, yet uses the former almost exclusively. And what should we do with mentions of the Sudan in articles such as E. A. Wallis Budge? Is that case a case of colonial propaganda like the Ukraine? Or is that a historic use like the Congo?--Adûnâi (talk) 11:53, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Egyptian

change ((Egyptian)) and ((Nubian)) to ((Egyptians|Egyptian)) and ((Nubian people|Nubian)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:541:4304:e6b0:218:8bff:fe74:fe4f (talk) 13:57, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Done jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 15:32, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2017

151.254.69.16 (talk) 14:50, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Explain the edit you want to make or mistake to correct. –Ammarpad (talk) 15:26, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 16:47, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

What I want to say in this article is abuse of User:Materialscientist it does not respect my amendments and accept the opinion I want to request protection of this article so as not to overstate it. 93.169.99.33 (talk) 20:21, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2017

On 6th/October/2017 president Donald Trump lifts economic sanctions on The Sudan, while leaving some restrictions on persons accused of atrocities during the Darfur war.

M0za22 (talk) 17:33, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Done Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:23, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2017

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
Please request your change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 09:49, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sudan. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081003091005/http://www.amnestyusa.org/Business_and_Human_Rights/The_Big_4/page.do?id=1081006&n1=3&n2=26 to http://www.amnestyusa.org/Business_and_Human_Rights/The_Big_4/page.do?id=1081006&n1=3&n2=26

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) 15:55, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Sudan. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130529175404/http://www.menasborders.com/menasborders/news/article/1956/South_Sudan_ready_to_declare_independence/ to http://www.menasborders.com/menasborders/news/article/1956/South_Sudan_ready_to_declare_independence/

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) 05:19, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Totalitarian government

The list of totalitarian regimes pages lists this country is a totalitarian dictatorship. Shouldn't that be mentioned in the article? (24.205.83.199 (talk) 00:57, 6 December 2017 (UTC))

Only if you can find a reliable source to support the claim. We cannot use Wikipedia as a source for Wikipedia. Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball!} 01:01, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Validity of recent edit…

…If TPS could ensure that the most recent IP edit about restoring old version is legit I would appreciate it. Found it through STiki as I was finishing up and can't DIY it. Thanks, L3X1 Happy2018! (distænt write) 02:38, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Protests

There is a new wave of anti-government protests in Sudan over bread prices (among other things). Would anyone like to help me create an article about them? Charles Essie (talk) 21:41, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Here’s some sources I’ve found;

• Sudan protests: Three dead in 'bread protests'
• High school student killed in protests as price of bread doubles in Sudan
• Sudan police fire tear gas as protesters march against price rises
• Sudanese protesting bread prices arrested and beaten
• Communist leader detained after Sudan demonstration
• Protests rock Sudan's capital as bread prices soar
• SPLM-N Agar backs anti-austerity mobilisation as SLM-Minnawi condemns crackdown on protesters
• Sudan: An ailing dictatorship, looming public protest, and desperate evasive tricks
• Sudanese protest in Khartoum against rising bread prices

Charles Essie (talk) 21:52, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2018

In the first paragraph, there is a spelling error with "through" it says "though" instead. IAditya Empire (talk) 17:05, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for catching this. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Reworking the lead section

The lead section, in particular the part about the pre-colonial history, is way too bloated with irrelevant details and is filled with inaccuracies and even some Islamic propaganda. I will drastically rework it and if someone has major issues with it afterwards let me know here. LeGabrie (talk) 13:38, 27 April 2018 (UTC) @Mameab1989

The old edits must return again

I think that it is necessary, to restore the old editing. Because it is better than the current editing, because most of this editing has already been converted. But some users and administrators in particular, and in general delete them. They didn't explain to me what is the reason behind this thing. Kingston, CA (talk) 21:36, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

It's not helpful to copy-and-paste a large portion of your preferred revision; we can't easily see how it's different from the current version. Please posts diff links instead. Click on the article's "history" tab, select two versions, then click "Compare selected revisions" which will create a diff link, then post your diff link like this. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:39, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh thanks for advising me whatever you are I'm glad to be here. Kingston, CA (talk) 07:09, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

The old editing must be restored as soon as possible. Kingston, CA (talk) 09:01, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I've reverted your change again. You've made a large set of changes in a single edit. I'd suggest breaking it down into smaller changes, including: (1) spelling of native name (2) government type (3) GDP stat changes without updating the accompanying source (4) a change to the lede that omits a reference to the split of the country in 2011 (5) many other changes. It may be easier for you to get consensus for these individually than as a single large edit. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:29, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

You aren't going to convince anybody by explaining the advantages of your version with "because it is better than the current editing", especially if it has numerous grammar and content errors. LeGabrie (talk) 15:24, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I was very confused, so I imagined the usefulness of associating the events with regard to the kingdoms after and before the advent of Islam, and there is a clear taking of the old edits regarding the period of the Anglo-Egyptian rule, the rise of Sudanese nationalism, the subsequent period of independence and the frequent military coups and the imposition of Islamic fundamentalism and the conflict that took place in the south and the imposition of United Nations sanctions with the addition of the new editing in my belief that the old edits its better because it concise coordinated words. Kingston, CA (talk) 17:26, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Eh, so what are you saying? That the part about the pre-colonial history is too long compared to the part describing what happened after 1821? LeGabrie (talk) 16:49, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I didn't mean this part what I mean concerning the Kingdom of Nubia and other kingdoms before the influx of the Arabs and the emergence of Islam and also the Islamic Kingdoms like Funj people and many others are as brief as the old edits. Kingston, CA (talk) 20:47, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

In what Region is Sudan?

The page for Sudan says it's in Northeast Africa but that region does not exist, also all Wikipedia links about African regions don't include Sudan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_regions_of_Africa. Even a definition for Northeast Africa is hard to find online though the CIA fact book says Sudan is in north-eastern Africa. So, since Sudan isn't included in North Africa or Horn Africa and Northeast Africa does not seem to exist, in what region is Sudan besides East Africa?

Arboleh (talk) 00:03, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

The Encyclopedia Britannica also calls Sudan a northeastern African state. LeGabrie (talk) 22:39, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

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

• Headquarters of the Sudanese Judiciary.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:07, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Sudaness Republican Palace.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:52, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Wusta listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Wusta. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:48, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Government section of the infobox

The military government has suspended sudan’s Constitution, so does this mean we should just put Military Junta in the government section? Or do we put federal presidential republic under a military junta? The History Nerd5 (talk) 18:46, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Etymology

The etymology of "bilad al-sudan" need clarification. In my ignorance of arabic, I know that "black" in arabic it's "aswad" and not "sudan". Kleistinos (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

"Aswad" is a singular noun means black, "Sood" is the plural noun. Sudan is also a plural to the word "Aswad" but this form of plural is derived and influenced by the Persian language. Abdulla Mohiedeen (talk) 03:56, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

7th or 8th millennium

In the sudan page it states that "By the eighth millennium BC, people of a Neolithic culture had settled into a sedentary way of life there in fortified mudbrick villages, where they supplemented hunting and fishing on the Nile with grain gathering and cattle herding." While the page states that "By the seventh millennium BC, people of a Neolithic culture had settled into a sedentary way of life there in fortified mud-brick villages, where they supplemented hunting and fishing on the Nile with grain gathering and cattle herding." Which is the correct answer? If anyone has the answer I'd appreciate it I have a project due on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingnunandrhysandfan (talk • contribs) 19:14, 6 October 2019 (UTC)