Talk:Timeline of the 2011–2012 Saudi Arabian protests (from July 2012)

It is requested that an image or photograph of Timeline of the 2011–2012 Saudi Arabian protests (from July 2012) be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.

Wikipedians in Saudi Arabia may be able to help!

The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

A fact from Timeline of the 2011–2012 Saudi Arabian protests (from July 2012) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 21 July 2012 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Eastern Province Saudi Arabians called for the downfall of the House of Saud during July 2012 protests?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2012/July. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Timeline of the 2011–2012 Saudi Arabian protests (from July 2012).

Wikipedia

Arab world Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arab world, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Arab world on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Arab worldWikipedia:WikiProject Arab worldTemplate:WikiProject Arab worldArab world articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Saudi Arabia Low‑importance

	Saudi Arabia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Saudi Arabia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Saudi ArabiaWikipedia:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaTemplate:WikiProject Saudi ArabiaSaudi Arabia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology: Social Movements Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the social movements task force.

Western Asia Low‑importance

	Asia portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Western Asia, which collaborates on articles related to Western Asia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Western AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Western AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Western AsiaWestern Asia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

27 July

[1] Mohamed CJ (talk) 12:57, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Press TV is deprecated

Press TV has lots of interesting coverage, making many claims!

Press TV is also a deprecated source, given to fabrication and propaganda. This means we literally can't trust a word from it. It fails WP:RS, which is required for the hard policy WP:V.

To restore the claims made by Press TV, we first need coverage from reliable sources for each claim - if such RSes exist. If they don't, that's even more reason to doubt the Press TV claims.

Context matters - but the overriding context here is that Press TV makes stuff up, and literally can't be trusted. Just saying "context matters" isn't really sufficient to override WP:V. Do we have RSes for each of the claims from Press TV? - David Gerard (talk) 14:29, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, the overriding context here is that Saudi Arabia is an absolute dictatorship, and that some news leaks out to countries like Iran, which is authoritarian, but does have some elements of democracy and political diversity, with frequent street protests, and also systematic, but not absolute, human rights violations (arrests, torture of protestors and other dissidents). Trust in sources for Wikipedia is ~~not~~ rarely absolute "can/can't be trusted" for any source. So the context is not a simple yes/no situation. I propose this discussion be centralised at the current RfC on Press TV. Boud (talk) 15:00, 25 June 2021 (UTC) (modification: Some sources like Daily Mail are justified for absolute blacklisting, even though sometimes they make statements with elements of truth. Boud (talk) 15:19, 25 June 2021 (UTC))[reply]

The RFC on WP:RSN on this specific question has finished, and overwhelmingly concluded that Press TV is not a usable source for this issue, as it is not for any issue. The claim "context matters" was raised, but was not sufficient to sway the RFC consensus. As such, I've removed the usages again.

If you have particular claims that are supported in reliable sources, you should restore those points with the reliable sources supporting them - David Gerard (talk) 18:56, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In general, we're using a lot of Press TV here, in addition to sources like random twitter accounts that appear to be suspended. We need to clean this page up quite a bit, and I've tagged the page accordingly. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 06:25, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]