User talk:Juiced lemon

Hi,

Probably you are new to Wikipedia, if yes be warmly welcomed. I am not a veteran neither. I have anserwed you on my talk page, s. below:

Hello,

I agree with your text above. I renamed the Coat of arms of Western Sahara to Coats of arms of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (Commons:Category:Coats of arms of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic explains the bad spelling), but I read the archives of Talk:Flag of Western Sahara afterwards. What can we do to restore impartiality? Can this link help? (notice that there is no flag on the right of the country/location name in the dark blue zone). --Juiced lemon 19:32, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Juiced lemon,

Glad to know and thank you. The item is definitely presented in a biased way and must be redone. Wikipedia should not care about Polisario's and pro-Polisario activists opinions.
Sources like this that one help as they make it clear that WS is a territory and not a state.
This topic had apparently been taken to the Move requests page WP:RM. If you manage to go through the archive then that would be great. Any action in this sense is appreciated.

Thanks & Regards - wikima 20:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The so-called "Free Zone"

Hi Juiced lemon,

You have restored the article on the so-called "free zone". Please can you explain why and discuss? That would be great: [1]

Thanks - wikima 11:41, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naming conventions

Hi - you asked about the titles of articles on places in Wales. The consensus is that they should be disambiguated by county, not by nation - i.e., "city, Gwynedd", not "city, Wales". You can find guidance at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (settlements). As you can see from the names of other places in Wales, this has been widely adopted, and no others are disambiguated by nation. Additionally, although not a motivation for my original move, "Bangor, Wales" could refer to Bangor-on-Dee. Warofdreams talk 22:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Western Sahara map request

Can you be more specific in what you are looking for in a Western Sahara map? There are already two maps based on the U.N. map in commons and I've noticed that insane edit wars erupt whenever someone tries to use one of them. Is there a consensus on what a NPOV map should look like? Kmusser 18:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thank you for your answer to my request.

A NPOV map is a map which displays only factual features. I think there is a general consensus about that, and we don't need a particular consensus for a particular map.

These 2 maps

display controled zones, though the 2 opposed sides have not concluded any treaty or agreement in order to delimit these zones. More, one of these maps don't specify any date or source. I think that these maps are unusuable in any NPOV article.

The MINURSO map displays interesting factual features like oueds, lakes, localities, roads, and the berm. But, I wish a general map for Western Sahara, and I don't want the extra informations regarding the MINURSO. So, I would be glad if you could make a new map of Western Sahara, based on the MINURSO map, since it is far most precise than the current maps of Western Sahara in Commons.

Main needed changes to the MINURSO map:

to remove the special MINURSO informations in the caption
to remove the UN warnings and references
to replace the map icons for localities where the MINURSO was deployed (blue names, do not confuse with geographic features)
to change the color of locality names from blue to black ("Staging Area" is not a locality and has to be removed)
optionally, you can also resize the height near 20° and 30° parallels. --Juiced lemon 12:10, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That should be doable, should have something next week.Kmusser 17:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are the names on the U.N. map what should be used? As in Laayoune vs. El Aaiun? Working on it - it is proving a little more dificult than anticipated, I don't want to copy the U.N. map directly because it is copyrighted, but other sources (using Rand McNally and Google Earth for reference) disagree on where basic geographic features are located and what they are named. Kmusser 19:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New map posted on the Western Sahara talk page for discussion.Kmusser 17:02, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested moves

I re-opened the discussion on the move of Trentino-South Tyrol and South Tyrol. If you want to say your opinion, you're welcome. --Checco 07:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of sovereign states

Huh? I'm confused by your edit summary, and you didn't write on Talk. Can you explain your edit? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 14:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You talked about the presence of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic in the list, your edits regard the replacement of “Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic” with “Western Sahara”. Association between Western Sahara and the flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is not NPOV.

Notice also that the first letter of “Western Sahara” is W, not S like “Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic”. --Juiced lemon 15:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where else would the SADR go? Clearly, it is placed with Western Sahara, to use your terminology. Also, it is not clear that the presence of the flag is POV, and in fact, that exact argument has been used on several articles and has never gotten any community consensus. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Western Sahara is a disputed territory between Morocco and with the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic. So, every association of Western Sahara with the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is POV, understanding that Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic owns legitimate rights over Western Sahara. It's also POV when you associate Western Sahara with any symbol of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.

Association between Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic and any symbol of Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is OK.

I don't understand your question. We are discussing about the criteria for the list of sovereign states. We'll take care of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic case afterwards, if necessary. --Juiced lemon 16:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV? It's not clear that it is POV and that's never been established. You're editing as those it is fact, and it's not. It is not the case that "every association of Western Sahara with the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is POV," as the SADR is by its very nature, associated with Western Sahara; it is the government-in-exile of the latter. My question was using your terminology of the SADR "going" with Western Sahara. Clearly it does "go" with it; the two are associated. It's not like "Western Sahara" and "Federal Democratic Republic of Germany." Those two don't go together; they are irrelevant to one another. The SADR and WS are relevant to one another. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 16:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Morocco and Western Sahara are also relevant to one another. Wikipedia articles have to be neutral regarding the dispute between Morocco and SADR. Association between China and Republic of China would be POV, too. Of course, I speak about associations which are out of any context, like in lists or templates. --Juiced lemon 16:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I'm not advocating against NPOV, but the SADR is the government-in-exile of Western Sahara; no other government is. The Kingdom of Morocco is the government of the territory of Morocco. I really don't understand your PRC/ROC reference or that last sentence at all. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assume you are reading a list with this association:

China

Would that be NPOV?

Republic of China is a government-in-exile of China, as Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is a government-in-exile of Western Sahara, except that no sovereign state has never governed Western Sahara. Western Sahara is only a geographical region, a previous Spanish colony. --Juiced lemon 17:29, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

China and

China

would be NPOV, since they would choose one of two Chinese states to call "China." That is to take a side in the Chinese Civil War. The ROC administers some of its territory, as does the SADR and the PRC. None of them administer all of their claimed territory. The statement "no sovereign state has never governed Western Sahara" is untrue, as you show with your next comment: Spain governed it, and that territory was, in fact, a part of Spain. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:34, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting without talking

Why? On Template:ESH, you reverted and ignored my comments on talk. Why would you do that? Don't you realize that is only going to protract any kind of dispute on the page? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies Please ignore the above; I confused an edit of A Jalil's with yours. Again, I apologize. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template edits

This is frustrating Your edits to these templates are breaking their functionality and creating redundancies within articles. Please stop it. If you have some kind of issue with the page Flag of Western Sahara, bring it up there. You shouldn't be using all of these templates as some odd proxy for that; the Wikipedia consensus is and has been that the image in question is the "flag of Western Sahara" and blithely asserting that as POV is neither constructive nor useful for other users. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 18:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further Please don't make a controversial edit to an article/template with a POV tag. Especially without any discussion on talk or consensus reached anywhere on the issue. Why did you do this? Did you think I would not object? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 18:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have protested when I made a temporary change of Template:ESH. Now, you protest because I have restored the previous version of this template. You wear me out. --Juiced lemon 18:40, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, you didn't First, you changed text, then the picture. As you can clearly see, the template is different than it was 24 hours ago, and that breaks its usage. It functions by having a flag and certain text, and if you change it to a map and/or different text, you ruin its functionality. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 18:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the article Flag of Western Sahara don't allow the association of this flag with the Western Sahara territory. This issue was never debated, and the poll about the name of the flag is insignificant regarding our discussion about its use in templates. --Juiced lemon 18:58, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay Changing these templates breaks their use and serves to make a point that has yet to be established about POV (in point of fact, the opposite has been the consensus.) The issue has been debated several times, as you will see if you look at the archived talk there, and if you think that editing all these templates as a proxy for debate is a good idea, you're mistaken; it's going to result in many more headaches than are necessary. If you want to discuss, mediate, arbitrate, etc. please do it there. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 19:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

While koavf is trying to make you believe he is talikng to you and trying to sort things out, he has posted on the Administrators Notice Board to complain about the changes you were doing. As usual, his arguments are weak and easily refutable.--A Jalil 19:53, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support. --Juiced lemon 08:51, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Western Sahara

Hi there Juiced lemon,

Western Sahara is not *technically* a soverign country according to the United Nations and this is why it is not included in the "Africa in topic" template as a soverign nation, but rather as a dependency. Its the same reason why Kosovo is not a soverign country in Europe, but also listed under the dependencies. I am going to revert your good faith edits and I hope you will not engage in an edit war. If you want to discuss the issue with me, please leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks--Thomas.macmillan 16:14, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Saharan Scouting

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to Sahraoui Scout Association, you will be blocked from editing. I am now treating your repeated edits as vandalism, since you can't be bothered to source the claims you make. The World Organization of the Scout Movement is a reputable source, and you have provided none of your own. Your politics don't belong in those articles. Chris 09:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely explained why I reverted your retaliatory deletion tag. Learn English. Chris 10:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't explain anything. Learn reasoning. If I cite the United Nations, that doesn't prove that the Republic of Patagony exists. --Juiced lemon 10:52, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Prod

If anybody removes a prod template from any article for any reason, please do not put it back. Thanks. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 11:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then ... that's an interesting way to weasel around with words and completely miss the point. If anybody removes a prod template, just don't put it back. Period. If you still want the article deleted, please go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Prod is simply designed to allow completely uncontested deletion nominations to go through more easily.

I have no dispute with you over the accuracy of the article, though I will say that attributing the whole thing to some random guy's reports is a little sketchy. The reverting back and forth is getting a little ridiculous, though. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 11:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, well I finally took a look at the dispute. It looks like you want to change references to "Western Sahara" to "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic." However, the source provided in the article indeed makes references to Western Sahara, instead of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.

That said, from the posts I read on the site, it doesn't look like it's possible to verify the existence of a separate national Scouting organization in WS/SADR. The Spanish website refers to "Hassani" Scouts, if I remember correctly, while the website of l'Organisation du Scout Marocain refers the existence of "Le Scoutisme Hassania Marocain." Additionally, the Moroccan Scout organization's website notes that their 16 districts are based on that of Morocco's ( — Morocco has 16 districts, which include Western Sahara (Laâyoune-Boujdour-Sakia El Hamra and Oued Ed-Dahab-Lagouira). This suggests some overlap; we're probably just dealing with Moroccan Scouts in Western Sahara.

From what I can tell at the moment, this article should probably be deleted. We're taking reports of work between Spanish Scouts and Moroccan Scouts in Western Sahara to postulate the existence of an independent national organization there. It looks like the name is made up for the sake of giving the article a title, too. Even if the Sahraoui Scout Association did exist, it looks like it would be a subdivision within the Moroccan Scout organization, if anything else. Either way, for now, this article looks like unreferenced and unverifiable original research that's most likely not completely accurate. Giving Western Sahara independent status here doesn't look like it adheres to our neutral point of view policy, either. I'll let some people know at the Scouting Wikiproject. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 13:22, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Could you explain your edit comment here [2]? Hornplease 21:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. Population of India is more than 1000,000,000 inhabitants, and we can expect “some” namesakes in this population. In this context, abbreviate an only firstname is inane. More, it's not Wikipedia policy. --Juiced lemon 21:40, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. There are several people named Bill Clinton, as well, but we do not move his page to William Jefferson Clinton on the off chance. For the convention of surname and initial, see the pages M. G. Ramachandran and M. Karunanidhi for comparable articles. This is a cultural aspect of how Tamils are named, and we respect it on WP. See WP:Bias. Hornplease 22:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are not the Wikipedian Community. WP:Bias is a simple project, that is not an authority. I apply the naming conventions, in particular Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people), and these conventions don't say anything about cultural aspects in various areas of the World. More, I never heard of abbreviated firstnames in Indian passports. --Juiced lemon 23:08, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further discussion should take place at WP:RM. See also Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (people)#Proposal on spacing of initials in names. Hornplease 23:21, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of the SADR

Hello,

According to discussion in Template talk:ESH, the idea that Western Sahara has no flag is accepted. Is there something which prevents the move of Flag of Western Sahara to Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic? --Juiced lemon 20:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your question very well. Do you mean in the technical sense, so that any attempt to move the page fails technically?

Regards - wikima 21:36, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. Flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is a redirection page without history. So, I don't think there is currently any technical difficulty. --Juiced lemon 23:10, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand that you find the name of the page Coat of arms of Western Sahara objectionnable and understand the reasons why you moved it (although it's unilateral), I think this redirection is a nasty WP:POINT violation. Please don't do that again, and I advise you to seek WP:DR. Not that Justin is innocent. Duja► 11:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this edit (YOURS) is a nasty WP:POINT violation.

Western Sahara is a disputed territory, and has no history as a state. Therefore, any symbol related to this territory is a symbol which is granted by the controlling country(ies). In the present case, the only controlling country is Morocco, and Morocco have not granted symbols to Western Sahara. Therefore, Coat of arms of Western Sahara would be deleted. Currently, the more neutral solution is a redirection to Coat of arms of Morocco. --Juiced lemon 12:35, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--Juiced lemon 12:35, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your view required

Hi Juiced Lemon, you view might be required and helpful here as you have been dealing with topics re the WS conflict.

It would be great if you say your word. Thanks - wikima 21:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: ancient Rome

Hi Juiced lemon, the reason for not capitalizing "ancient" in phrases like this is that it's not part of a proper noun. See, e.g. Art in ancient Greece, Religion in ancient Greece. Probably this should be fixed on Commons, but it's not something I'm too concerned about. --Akhilleus (talk) 14:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Western Sahara

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "Flag of Western Sahara". Thank you. -- Nightw 07:54, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments requested at Flag of Western Sahara

Hello - Your comment is requested over at Talk:Flag of Western Sahara; there is an RfC underway there to help decide what the article contents should be. If you can take some time to share your opinion on the matter, it would be very much appreciated. --Tachfin (talk) 09:48, 21 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:11, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]