Template talk:Ethnic groups in Western Sahara

SADR flag neutrality issue

User:Koavf, per your request for discussion, and given I've already made my jurisdiction clear, please explain your reasoning for including the SADR flag this on this template and Template:Languages of Western Sahara? I'm sure you understand these template are for Western Sahara - a disputed territory claimed by Morocco, controlling two-thirds of the territory, and a partially recognised state - the SADR - controlling the remaining third. As I said:

Western Sahara is a disputed territory and displaying the flag of a state recognised by only 40 UN members is a violation of WP:NPOV.

This is not "Ethnic groups in the SADR" or "Languages in the SADR". Rob984 (talk) 17:10, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Western Sahara either exists as the SADR (which comes with its flag), or not at all (the alternative view being that it is an integral part of Morocco). In articles that assumes Western Sahara exists, I don't see an issue using the SADR flag. Number 57 22:08, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

The idea that there is only two possible viewpoints to the dispute is of your own invention, the UN does not recognise the SADR as the sole legitimate representative of the Sahrawi people. The SADR was formed under the supervision of outside actors and the UN is not naive to this. Also, Morocco recognises the issue of Western Sahara, given the territory was formerly administered by Spain. Granted it claims Western Sahara as part of it's Southern Provinces, but that's a matter of state-level Moroccan administration, subject to any changes in Morocco's territorial borders - of which the country recognises as disputed. Rob984 (talk) 16:17, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Rob984, How many UN members need to recognize it until it becomes okay to you? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:34, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

What, lacking neutrality in an issue that has no relevance to my life? The SADR was established under the supervision of outside state actors, one of which previously claimed the exact same territory Morocco does. And notably, Mauritania also has a sizeable indigenous Sahrawi minority within it's own borders. I don't personally feel the need to take a stance on such a complex issue. For example, can you not recognise as being somewhat suspect that Mauritania doesn't even record it's own native (non-refugee) Sahrawi minority, merely grouping them under "Hassaniya Arab"? Or did you already make up your mind and don't care for the opposing viewpoints to your own? Rob984 (talk) 16:17, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Rob984, I don't understand what you wrote and it doesn't answer my question. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:37, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

User:Koavf When UN members come to a consensus on the question of Western Sahara, determine Morocco has no basis to claim to the territory, and a legitimate recognised authority (likely one which permits full access for international observes to monitor human rights) chooses a flag for the country?

I was referring to the SADR being established by a group backed by Algeria. The Polisario Front even have authority within Algeria's own borders. For some context on the broader regional issues, see Algeria–Morocco relations.

Regardless, I don't know why yourself and User:Number 57 seem to think the issue is merely whether the SADR be granted recognition and Morocco expelled as an illegal occupier? This clearly isn't the UN position. It's not even the basis of the proposed referendum. A Western Sahara Authority would be established under the proposed transition arrangements. We don't know what form that would take. Western Sahara is today a disputed territory. By your own admissions your intents by wacking Sahrawi flags all over Wikipedia is seemingly to support the cause of the Polisario Front and the unilateral establishment of the SADR.

If you need reminding of the importance of impartiality to Wikipedia, re-equate yourself with WP:5P2. Sure seems you've both managed to get by all this time without fully grasping it.

Rob984 (talk) 00:46, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Rob984, Which policy is it that states that we need to have flags on navboxes based on what the UN says. (And yes, the UN has also called Morocco an illegal occupier of Western Sahara). It's interesting to me that you seem to know the proposed terms of a referendum that hasn't actually been negotiated in a process that has been functionally dead for 15 years. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:11, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Which policy is it that states that we need to have flags on navboxes based on what the UN says.

Explicitly, none that I'm aware. However perhaps you should refer to multiple sections of MOS:ICON which may be applicable:

• #Do not re-purpose icons beyond their legitimate scope
• #Overbroad use of flags with politicized connotations
• #Do not emphasize nationality without good reason

Including a flag icon in a navbox for a topic relating to a disputed territory seems to me like needlessly making a political statement.

And yes, the UN has also called Morocco an illegal occupier of Western Sahara

Which resolutions or reports refer to Morocco as an illegal occupier or illegally occupying? I can so far only find references to Morocco as an "occupying force", and lacking recognition of it's sovereignty claim. The ICJ ruled that Morocco had legal ties to the territory prior to Spanish colonisation, though notwithstanding the right to self-determination of the population. Additionally Moroccan-sponsored economic activities have been referred by the ICJ as merely "violation of the principles of international law".

It's interesting to me that you seem to know the proposed terms of a referendum that hasn't actually been negotiated in a process that has been functionally dead for 15 years.

The principal of a Western Sahara Authority was agreed in the Houston Accord, a proposal accepted by the UN Security Council and signed by both parties. The issue of voter eligibility however wasn't.

Rob984 (talk) 03:34, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Rob984, There are flag icons on navboxes for Armenia, Israel, Palestine, etc. plenty of places that don't have universal recognition among states. I see no reason why this would be different. Additionally, occupation is illegal by its definition and your reading of the ICJ ruling is literally the exact opposite of what they wrote: I recommend that you read up before you write things like this. Claims like, "They didn't violate the law, just the principle of the law" are frankly baffling and embarrassing. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:51, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

There are flag icons on navboxes for Armenia, Israel, Palestine, etc.

Yet not on West Bank, Palestinian territories, East Jerusalem, Nagorno-Karabakh. SADR is not indisputably synonymous with "Western Sahara". That's a niche perspective, not widely recognised by the international community. Armenia, Israel, even Palestine are widely recognised states yet their disputed territories are shown as disputed, and aren't plastered with flags. Guess that's too hard concept for you to grasp?

Honestly I don't care enough to keep going with this. ICJ rulings are not in favour of an Algerian proxy militia, they are in favour of the views of the people of Western Sahara. It's "frankly baffling and embarrassing" you can't distinguish the two. Coverage of this issue on Wikipedia a joke, a sensitive issue plastered with citation needed on every article is an embarrassment. Editors like yourself are precisely why.

Rob984 (talk) 13:07, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Rob984, I'm not interested in collaborating with you as long as you write inappropriate things like, "Guess that's too hard concept for you to grasp?" Are you here to write an encyclopedia or not? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:22, 21 January 2020 (UTC)