Talk:Bahrain/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Pearl Diving

I believe there should be a section on pearl diving in this article, since it once made up the majority of Bahrain's economy.--HobbesDS (talk) 12:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Biased Link

I'm curious about the link at the bottom of the page that is named "Why google earth was forbidden in Bahrain". Having gone through the presentation, the information seems completely biased, skewed, and fictious. There are no sources, references, or even a signature of some sort of the person who put up the link. I think it should be removed until it is validated.--129.118.198.245 09:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Copyright issue

This paragraph:

"Environmental issues facing Bahrain include desertification resulting from the degradation of limited arable land and coastal degradation (damage to coastlines, coral reefs, and sea vegetation) resulting from oil spills and other discharges from large tankers, oil refineries, and distribution stations."

is almost word-for-word from the CIA World Factbook. [1] It should be rewritten. I don't have time to do this, so if someone else could, that would be great. Pageblank 22:39, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

There is no copyright issue: "The Factbook is in the public domain. Accordingly, it may be copied freely without permission of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)." [2] --Catawba 16:22, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

That section sounds like it has an agenda to argue that Bahrain shouldn't be its own country and I wondered the same about the two words. They share one entry under "referendum," but that does say that "plebiscite" can be used to refer to votes carried out by an undemocratic regime for its own purposes. The assumption that the two are different also appears in the following article listed amoung the external links. Is that where the author got this info? It describes a process of a series of consultations rather than a big vote.

Mishmahig Islands (Bahrain), How it was separated from Iran? http://www.iranchamber.com/geography/articles/mishmahig_islands_bahrain.php

Could someone write an article about position etc of the Amwaj Islands which were recently in the news but nowhere covered in wikipedia except an item about the filming of Big Brother in Bahrain.

The article has been extensively rewritten and no longer has the pro-Iranian POV or hairsplitting on meaning of "plebescite" discussed above.

Bahrain is an interesting country. I would like to know more about the portuguese era - when was it, and are there portuguese colonial monuments / buildings there? I hope someone who knows about this would update the history section - because the article is really lacking in this department. --SWA 16:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Michael Jackson And Eyob Girma?!

Isn't it a bit absurd to mention Michael Jackson in this article? I mean, it's like adding the phrase "Eyob Girma went to China and brought a child home" in the China article. - Eagle^amn 20:19, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

How can you say that? MJ is the greatest singer in the whole world and he heals children with his touch! You're just a hater [/sarcasm] Not much we can do. Bahrain's stuck with him and we just have to bear the shame and the insults....

I don't think you realize how small Bahrain is, every kid in the street is boasting and making jokes about the connection. Bahrain is no bigger, by population or land area, than a small-medium U.S. city. It is 'big news' as far as Bahrain is concerned, whether or not it is encyclopedia worthy, I don't know, but having lived in Bahrain for a few months, I found it interesting.

As of January 2007, when I came to the island, M. Jackson is nowhere to be found in Bahrain. Rumors (unsubstantiated so far) have it that he has been expelled for impersonating a woman by wearing an abaya (full length black women's garb) in a shopping mall. An I second the comment about the size of Bahrain making this interesting to the article. Bab el Bahrain 03:39, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I do agree that it is not exactly "Bahraini Culture" that Micheal Jackson may or may not have intended to live there. --HobbesDS (talk) 01:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Places of interest in Bahrain

Hi There, I am a new traveller to Bahrain. I would like to enquire if you can tell me the places of interests in the city. Cheers and much thanks I can be reached at manhattan sterling@yahoo.com.sg

Two seas

Hey, Bahrain is a cool place. I lived there for 7 years, so I would know. --> (Hpetwe 01:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC))

Since Bahrain previously referred to the entire area including what is currently Saud, wouldnt it make more sense that two seas refers to the red sea and the persian gulf, rather than the fact that both sweet water and salty water are present.

No, because even then, Bahrain was the name of the almost entire west coast of Persian gulf, not entire Saudi, so it was always be about the fresh water coming from wells in the salty sea's bed.

--eL_3eDeL (talk) 00:32, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Spring of Culture

I've put a link to the Spring of Culture festival that's running during March 2006. The link needs to be removed at the end of the month when the festival ends. 82.194.62.22 08:22, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed it because I thought it was broken, but actually it works fine in explorer (I'm using firefox). Yes, I'll try to remember. Thanks. El_C 08:30, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Mishmahig

I see no reason to refer to the name Mishmahig at the start of this article. Since independence in 1973 Bahrain has had two names: State of Bahrain (1973-2002); Kingdom of Bahrain (2002-). The term Mishmahig has never been used to describe the sovereign state to which this article refers.

It should be noted that in Bahrain's history it has been referred to with numerous names: Dilmun, Tylos, Awal and according to irredentist Persians, Mishmahig. It is one former term among many.

I would also advise removing the redirection from Mishmahig to Bahrain that currently operates as they do not refer to the same concept.

Deep Blue Sea 12:31, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I think fighting history to remove the Persian background of Bahrain is too absurd! ( whether or not you like it, Mishmahig was the name of the place for a long period of time. so instead of unbelievable suggestions to revise the history for Arab nationalistic pleasure!!!, try to learn about facts. Darius-Tehran —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.139.212.150 (talk) 11:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

copyright violation

Please note: I have deleted the first 2 paragraphs from "Culture" after it sounded too much like a travaler-guide to me. I've Googled some sentences from it and found this, with a copyright note from Lonely Planet.The second paragraph wasn't all copied out from the LP, but the few words that were original weren't much (a bit from a sentence about spoken languages, which should be in Demographics if anywhere), so I've deleted them as well. Havelock 18:34, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Adding new man-made islands onto the coastline of Bahrain?

I saw a TV program (in early 2006) that referred to the creation of numerous large islands along the coastline of Bahrain since 1999. Some interesting shapes (like a palm tree, about a mile in length, with hundreds of luxury building sites) were being created by massive dredging and filling. I'm surprized not seeing anything about this project in the current Wikipedia article, except for one vague sentence, Construction proceeds on several major industrial projects. It would be interesting to see a map (or better yet, aerial photos) of major new development, and a factual description of the huge project.

While searching, I found some info ... shares in the Amwaj Islands Project, northeast of Muharraq, have been sold to the public... The BD378 million ($1 billion) tourism project is being developed by Amwaj Property Development Company and promoted by Ossis Property Developers... -- but that is a much smaller development project than the one shown in the TV program. Several other projects such as Durrat Al-Bahrain, in the southeast, are mentioned here: [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]. Those are similar projects, but not as large as the one featured in the one-hour TV program that described the engineering, environmental, and economic factors of the huge, ongoing project to be completed in 2006. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.231.242.11 (talk • contribs).

Actually, there is an article about Amwaj Islands. ~MK~ (talk) 02:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Adding Amwaj Islands as a link under Places in Bahrain on the Bahrain page.

Shijaz 04:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

See Dubai and the Palm Islands of Jumeira?

Motto/Anthem

According to the article on Bahrainona, that's the former national anthem, not the motto. Could someone who knows more about the subject correct this, so that the actual current anthem is listed, and if possible the motto? Pruneau 11:05, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Education !!

College of Health Sciences (Ministry of Health) in bahrain does not train physicians as its stated in the article. the Arabian Gulf University does.

yea this info. is correct

Space image

the space image of bahrain should be tilted to the right 90".. in this one north is on the left..

Whoever noticed this is correct. The pointy end of the main island should be at the bottom. However, when I downloaded the current image to my own computer and rotated it 90 degrees clockwise, it still doesn't come out right. To get it aligned with N at the top I had to go to a 118 degree rotation -- which makes the overall NASA photo end up looking like a lopsided diamond. Someone out there able to solve this? Catawba 22:28, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Deleting external link without explanation

I don't understand why the external link added by Trentono on 10 August was reverted without explanation by Pentaholmes later the same day. I followed the link and it appears to be legitimate and germane. Is there a Wikipedia policy that explains why this happened? Catawba 21:53, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Jumping the gun on the UNGA presidency

Actually, Sheikha Haya Rashed Al-Khalifa from Bahrain will be the President of the 61st United Nations General Assembly when it opens on September 12, 2006. --Catawba 03:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Smallest Arab nation?

"Bahrain [...] is a borderless island nation [...]. It is also the least populous country in mainland Asia (but not of Asia overall, because Maldives and Brunei are smaller)." If it's an island then it isn't part of mainland Asia. Richard Pinch 11:39, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

BAHREIN DURING WORLD WAR II

The oil refineries of Manamah (Bahrein) were attacked (October 18, 1940) by 3 bombers "Marsupiali" of the Royal Italian Air Force. The bombers came from Rhodos. After the attack the Italian planes reached Zula (Eritrea). The attack surprised the British.

Proposed WikiProject

In my ongoing efforts to try to include every country on the planet included in the scope of a WikiProject, I have proposed a new project on Western Asia at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Western Asia whose scope would include Bahrain. Any interested parties are more than welcome to add their names there, so we can see if there is enough interest to start such a project. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:47, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Map?

With all the reclaimation projects, Bahrain has completely changes in geography. Could someone upload an uptodate map that shows all these additions? Also, could someone get some pics??

--WoodElf 05:31, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Administrative Divisions/Cities, Towns and Villages

I'd like comments on whether we need to have the sections "Administrative Divisions" & "Cities, Towns and Villages". There's already a Governorates of Bahrain page and a List of cities in Bahrain page, which includes the relevant information. Is this information of such importance that it should be included on the Bahrain page also? Any views? One man and his dog 19:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

King info is wrong

the head of state information needs repairing!

Inaccuracy

"and in 930 sacked Mecca and Medina, bringing the sacred Black Stone back to Bahrain". This 'Bahrain' is not the now present country of 'Bahrain' but the word referred in the past generally to the present area of 'Hasa Province' now known as the 'Eastern Province' in KSA. The Black Stone as per historical records was not brought to the present Bahrain but to the city of Hofuf in 'Hasa'. (ILAKNA 07:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC))

I know Iran has a territorial claim to Iran but this is rediculous. How can wikiusers let online Safravid imperialists deny the existence of a sovreign state!

Persian Gulf

The term Persian Gulf is the internationally recognised term and should not be replaced by Arabian Gulf. TerriersFan 22:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

19% persian

isnt bahrain 19% persian? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.27.157 (talk) 01:45, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree. the term "Arabian Gulf" is wrong and it should be immediately replaced. Since everybody only accepts the term Persians Gulf why there should be an Arabic Gulf? Thats a term that came up since the Arab nationalism grew. I think if Arabs like to use this term, then thy better only use it in the Arabic article.. NOT the English one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.15.19.223 (talk) 18:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I also agree; use Persian Gulf, not Arabian. Carl.bunderson (talk) 19:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

answer to our Saudi editor

Please before reacting so harshly to any thing Iranian read some neutral history books. Sunni Persians are not coverd by Ajam. Ajams are Shiite Iranians. Not only farsi=speaking but Also Shia Lors, Azeris etc... are called Ajams. The Sunni persians of southern Iran also tend to call the Shiites Ajam. Those Sunni Persians are usually from Larestan and Bastak.

As for independece. Bahrain has been under the Iranian rule. It does not mean that there were living no Arabs there. But it was Iranian territory. Even in the peace treaty between Safavid Iran and the portuguese bahrain is mentioned as Iranian territory. In the 19th century howver England had been there. Not only in bahrain but also in a range in southern Iran in Khuzestan and Baluchestan. even in tehran. They installed a Qatari Sheikh, but Bahrain was still part of Iran. Iran never recognized loss of bahrain after British came up with a deal and Mohammedreza Shah Pahlevi signed the transfer of authority in 1971. I can bring you sources. But you can see the history in wikipedia with regards to the Anglo/Persian war and the three Islansas of lesser Tunb, Greater Tunb and Abu Musa Islands issues. thanks--Babakexorramdin (talk) 12:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The info box field is there to tell the readers where Bahrain got it's independence from, no more no less. Whether Bahrain is Iranian territory or American or Chinese is irrelevant there. You can add a discussion over Bahrain's legal status or Bahrain's relation to Iran in a new section in this article or another article, or you can add more info on Bahrain's history as it relates to Iran to the "History" section, but please don't insist on adding irrelevant info to the Infobox. Thanks -- Slacker (talk) 20:44, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I do not see what is your prblem here. I said that Bahrain got its independence from IRAN. Shah of Iran signed the treaty. period. But if you feal at unease about the Iranian flavor here and hurts the Arabian superiorty feelings, thats another problem.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 20:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Bahrain got its independence from the UK; that's a fact, and it's backed up by reliable sources. If it was the Iranians that had withdrawn their forces in 1971 and if it was Iran that was colonizing Bahrain for 200 years before 1971, I would have no problem mentioning that because I sincerely do not care where this or any other country got its independence from, I just want accurate information in the infobox. This has nothing to do with "unease" about "Iranian flavor," so please assume good faith. I told you, you can add whatever you want about the relationship between Bahrain and Iran and Bahrain's legal status as long as it's in the appropriate section, and as long as you adhere to WP:NPOV, WP:RS, and WP:OR, and as long as you realize that Wikipedia is not a soapbox. I don't know what to say about the rest of your comment, though this is the third time you've made comments of an ad hominem nature on this page. I'll ask you again, please do not replace sourced info with false information. Thank you. -- Slacker (talk) 21:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Iran did not colonized Bahrain. It was an Island under Iranian sovereignty. UK had occupied it and replaced a Pro-Iranian Sheikh with a Qatari sheikh. Then they asked/forced the last Shah of Iran to sign the independece treaty. It is not really important whose forces withdraw from Bahrain. And for your information the British forces did not withdraw after Iran signed the treaty. On the contrast the UK got firm control over the Island now the Iranian claims were dropped. ps> as for now: Some reliable sources are more relaibel than the other.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 21:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

You're free to add info pertaining to what you just said in accordance with policy. Just remember this page is about giving information, it's not a debate forum regarding who has a better claim to what. Happy editing. -- Slacker (talk) 21:31, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you about "giving information"but I say that the information should be correct.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 21:33, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

the true History of Bahrain From SOAS

MISHMÂHIG ISLANDS

(Today Bahrain)

"How Was separated from Iran?"

By Dr Piruz Mojtahedzadeh

Translated from Persian for CAIS by: Abbas Farzamfar - 1998

Dr Piruz Mojtahedzadeh

The following account is an extract and translation from the article “Bahrain: the land of political movements”, published in Rahavard, a Persian Journal of Iranian Studies, CA, USA VOL.XI, NO.39, 1995.

Dr P. Mojtahedzadeh is a senior research member of the Geopolitics & International Boundaries Research Centre in University of London (SOAS), and the Chairman of Board of Directors of Urosevic Research Foundation, London.

Abstract: Mishmāhig Island, the present country known as Bahrain is a peninsular located in the southern half of the middle section of the Persian Gulf, which consist of 33 big and small islands. The total areas of these islands are 637 Square Kilometres. Population of Mishmahig is estimated to be half a million. The Shiite population is estimated to be of 70% to 75%b of the total, who most of them are from the “Bahaareyneh-gaan”; the decedents of Iranian origin population of the former Iranian province.

The Ancient history

The Middle-Persian/Pahlavi Mishmahig means "ewe-fish". The past civilization of the Mishmahig (Bahrain) Islands goes back into the depth of history, where “Dilmun culture” thrived two thousands years before Common era.

At the time of second Iranian Empire, the Achaemenids, this land was on the fringe of Iranian territory and when the forth dynasty, the Sasanian Empire was achieving its peak, the encroachment of the Arabs into the Iranian dominion of the southern Persian Gulf started. Shapur I took his forces to Mishmāhig and the southern coasts of the Persian Gulf and expelled the alien aggressors.

When Shapour II was only a child, the Arab incursion into the southern coasts of Iranian territory was mounted. As soon as Shapour II grew up, he decided to once and for all cut their hands off Mishmāhig and other Iranian territories of the southern coasts of the Persian Gulf forever. To implement such a decision required a hard and unforgettable punishment for the invaders. He sent his army to the region and pushed Arabs out of Iranian territories into the depth of Arabia and restored the security of the Persian Gulf.

What is evident is that the maritime and costal of Bahrain were part of Iranian territory from the beginning of Sasanian Empire until throughout of Iran was occupied by the Arabs Islamic forces and migration of Bedouins from Arabian deserts into southern Iranian territories started.

Buyyid dynasty, freed and reunited much of the country including Mishmāhig Islands, after controlling Abbasid caliphs at Baghdad, in Iranian province of Khavārvarān (today known as Iraq), and was part of Iranian realm until 1522 when Portuguese invaded the Island and overthrown the Governor called Jaboor. By In 1602 at the time of soaring power of Safavid dynasty, Iranian forces defeated Portuguese in ports and islands of Hormoz and expelled them from Mishmāhig and reunited the islands with the mainland Iran once again.

During this period Mishmāhig was administered by the tribes of Iranian origin of “Havāleh” in Zebāreh In northern of Qatar Peninsula, when Zebareh was herself under the rule of Government of Fars. Towards the end of Safavid periods though Zebareh Government was ruled namely by Iran, but mostly it was an obstinate and inattentive Government to the centre.

In 1737, when eradication of the local obstinacy was at its apogee, Lotf Ali Khan-e Zand was made in charge by Nāder Shah of Afshār dynasty to suppress the rogue ruler of Zebareh. From that time Mishmāhig was under the direct rule of Government of Fars and it was the Sheikh Naser Khan, the last Iranian ruler who on behalf of Karim Khan-e Zand the founder of Zandian dynasty would administer the affairs of Zebareh and Mishmāhig.

Modern history

The British interference* and the implementation of politics of “Depersonalisation of the Persian Gulf”

When Al-Khalifeh of Ban Atebeh of the Arabs entered Zebareh in 1765 political history of Mishmāhig and later Bahrain began a new period. It did not take long that he planned to rule Zebareh and Bahrain. Sheikh Naser Khan decided while punishing Bani-havaleh, to put Al Khalifeh in his place. He surrounded Zabaerh but was defeated heavily.

Bahrain in 1783 at the time of ruling of Karim Khan of Zandian dynasty fell into hands of Al Khalifeh and the rule of Iran over these islands was once again stopped.

Al Khalifeh since then was afflicted from encroachment and onslaught from different forces. Vahhābis, Masghatian, Ottoman Turks and finally the English; each one attempted on a few occasions to annex Bahrain to their Dominion.

In 1830 Sheikh Abdul Al Khalifeh declared dependence to the Iranian Government as the Egyptian Mohammad Pasha who took away Arabian Peninsula from Vahhabis on behalf of the Ottoman Empire wanted to know if the people of Bahrain are not in allegiance with Iran, they would ruled by him.

In 1860 the Government of Al Khalifeh repeated the same assertion when the British were trying to overpower Bahrain. Sheikh Mohammad Ben Khalifeh at that time wrote a letter to Nasseredian Shah declaring himself and his brother and all of members of Al Khalifeh and the people of Bahrain to be of Iranian subjects, and in another letter to the Iranian Foreign Minster, Sheikh Mohammad demanded from the Government of Iran to be directly guided and protected in the face of British pressure.

Later on, when the pressure of Colonel Sir Lewis Pelly increased on Al Khalifeh, Sheikh Mohammad requested military assistance from Iran, but the Government of Iran at that time did not had the ability to protect Bahrain from the British aggression. Therefore, the Government of British India eventually overpowered Bahrain and Colonel Pelly in May 1861 signed an agreement with Sheikh Mohammad and later with his brother Sheikh Ali that placed Bahrain under British rule and protection.

When the British forces galloped in Bahrain, they noticed that Sheikh Mohammad ben Khalifeh had hoisted Iranian Flags all over Bahrain’s towers and forts. The British representatives in 1868 signed another agreement with the rulers of Al Khalifeh to the effect Bahrain joined the British protectorate territories in the Persian Gulf. Other agreements of 1880 and 1892 completed ultimately the protectorate status of Bahrain to the British. So Bahrain, which was practically separated from Iran in 1783 but would namely confirm her allegiance to Iran, was practically, namely and officially separated from Iran between the years of 1868 and 1892 for the last time.

The unrest of people of Bahrain in fact began when the Britain colonialism officially established her ultimate and complete dominance over this territory in 1892. The first revolt and widespread uprising took place in the month of March 1895 against Sheikh Essa Ben Ali the then ruler of Al Khalifeh. Sheikh Essa was the first ruler of Al Khalifeh who was ruling on that land without any relations with Iran. SIR Arnold Wilson, the political representative of Britain in The Persian Gulf (the writer of book” The Persian Gulf”), arrived in Bahrain from Masghat at this time. The extent of this uprising developed further and some of the protesters were killed by the British forces.

In 1911 a group of merchants of Bahrain, demanded the restriction of the British influence in Bahrain. The leaders of this movement were arrested and exiled to India. In 1923 the British deposed Sheikh Issa Ben Ali with accused of opposing Britain and set up a permanent representative in Bahrain. This coincided with renewal of Iran` claim over the ownership of Bahrain and Sheikh Essa had been accused of welcoming this development. Also the attachment shown by the People of Bahrain towards the renewal of ownership’s claim by Iran caused concern for Britain. To remedy these problems, Britain dispatched one of the most experienced colonial officers, Sir Charles Belgrave as an advisor to the Emir of Bahrain in 1926. His harsh measures caused to intensify the increasing aversion of people towards him and resulted eventually in his expulsion from Bahrain in 1957. Belgrave’s colonial undertakings were not limited to the violent deeds against the people of Bahrain but a series of dastardly initiatives, which included deiranisation of Bahrain and The Persian Gulf, and the he proposal to change the name of Persian Gulf in 1937 which did not take place but carried out by Abdul Karim Ghasim, the dictator of Baghdad.

In 1927 Reza Shah in a letter to the Allied Nations Community demanded the return of Bahrain. Britain knew well that her weakened domination over Bahrain would be equal to loose control all over the Persian Gulf, decided to bring under control at any cost the uprisings of people of Bahrain. To achieve this the British elements encouraged conflicts between Shiite and Sunni in Bahrain.

The Iranian tendency in the uprising of this period was to such an extent that forced the Members of Parliament of Iran to pass a bill in the November of 1957, to the effect to announce Bahrain as the Fourteenth province of Iran, and two empty seats were considered for the representatives of this province. This action was detrimental for Iran as it caused numerous problems in the international relations, specially with some United Nations bodies, Britain, Saudi Arabia, and numbers of Arab countries and provided a big excuse for Iraqi extremist to extent anti Iranian campaign in the region. This action was against the people of Bahrain as not only caused an increase sense of precaution of Britain and the Government of Bahrain towards the Iranian connection of Bahrain’s people uprisings, but forced the freedom loving people of Bahrain from expressing any Iranian tendency in order to avoid accusation o f dependency to “the expansionist policies of Iran in the Persian Gulf”, which at time was being propagated intensely against her deserving rights in the Persian Gulf.

At this time, Britain carried out the dastardly cogitation to change the demographic face of Bahrain. This policy of “Deiranisation” in Bahrain consisted of importing a large number of different Arabs and others from British colonies as labourers into Bahrain. At the same time it is noteworthy that the demonstrations of year 1956 forced the rulers of Al Khalifeh to leave Manama (The capital of modern Bahrain) and reside in the village of Refae Al Gharbi and only Sunni Arab servitors as their bodyguards were allowed to live in that village.

However the Government of Al Khalifeh is considered a flexible and liberal Government to compare to all the Arab Governments of the Persian Gulf, especially in comparison to the Governments of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and to the dictatorship of Iraq. The reason for this flexibility should be looked into the following two nokteh: Firstly, the Arabs of Al Khalifeh (Bani Atub) found themselves from the beginning of their arrival among Iranians and could never do away with this notion of “Unwanted guests”, secondly the synthesis of population of Bahrain has been and is different the region Emirates.

While the other Emirates have been tribal communities, which have grown around the dominating tribe, Bahrain has been an urban society from the ancient times like the societies of Iran and Mesopotamia. For this reason the rulers of Bahrain have not been able to deprive every members of society from taking part in the affairs of the country.

In 1965, Iran began dialogues with Britain in anticipation to determine her borders in the Persian Gulf. It was not long enough that the endurance of these talks became impossible as both parties realised with the existing extensive differences over borders and territory in the region; including the dispute relating to the dominion of Bahrain, the determination of maritime borders between the northern and southern countries of the Persian Gulf is not feasible.

At the same time Malek Faisal, the King of Saudi Arabia arrived in Iran, which included the creation of Islamic Conference; and the decision to determine the maritime borders of the two countries. In return, it was agreed that Shah of Iran would visit Saudi Arabia in 1967. A week before this visit, the Saudis received Sheikh Essa Ben Salman Al Khalifeh, the Emir of Bahrain AS A HEAD OF State in Riyadh. This caused the cancellation of Shah's visit and the relation between the two countries tarnished severely. The mediation by Sultan Hasan, the king of Morocco repatriated the relationship between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Eventually Iran and Britain agreed that the matter of Dominion Of Bahrain to put to international judgment and requested the United Nations General Secretary to take on this responsibility.

It was a Plebiscite and not a Referendum! Iran was trying hard so that the destiny of Bahrain would be determined through a referendum. Britain was sternly opposed to this and the Government of Bahrain was not in any way prepared to accept such a referendum. The reason for opposing was that the Government of Al Khalifeh saw the legal concept of holding such a referendum would be to negate the 150 years of his rule in Bahrain. Finally Iran and Britain agreed to instead of holding Referendum, to request United Nations through conducting a Plebiscite (Nazar khaahi e oumoumi; opinion poll) in Bahrain, to determine the political future of that territory. Outant The then General Secretary of the United Nations, in reply to the letters of Iran and Britain in the month declared in the month of March 1970, his readiness to fulfill this mission and Sinior Vittorio Winspere Guicciardi the Manager of The United Nation office in Geneva was put in charge to execute the task. Guicciardi and his colleagues entered in Bahrain and began the task of conducting the Plebiscite on 30 March 1970.

This mission continued more than two weeks and during this period Guicciardi conducted meetings with the leaders of different groups and classes of people of Bahrain and finally surrounded his report no. 9772 to the General Secretary of the United Nations. Clause 57 of this report indicates: (the result of investigation has convinced me that the absolute majority of people of Bahrain demand that their territory to be officially recognised as an independent country with complete soverngnity and freedom of choosing relations with other nations.)

The report of Guicciardi was surrounded to the Security Council of the United Nations and in the meeting of 11th May 1970 was discussed. Following the ratification of this report, the mentioned resolution of Security Council was conveyed to the Governments of Iran and Britain.

The Governments of Iran reported the result of the mission and the resolution of the United Nations to the two assemblies (The lower and upper houses of Parliaments). The report of The Government was ratified by Iranian National Assembly (Mjles-e Shorāy-e Melli) in 14th of May, and by Iranian Senate (Majles-e Senā) on 18th of May.

Copyright © 1998-2008 The Circle of Ancient Iranian Studies (CAIS) from:

POV check on history section

The history section should be double-checked for accuracy and neutrality by third-party neutral users, as there seems to be a lot of "half-truths" and fringe theories presented as absolute facts. --07fan (talk) 16:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Examples of said "half-truths" and "fringe theories"? -- Slacker (talk) 17:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

You still have to state your reasons as per Wikipedia:POV check:

Place {{POV-check}} at the top of the suspect article, then explain your reasons on the talk page of the suspect article. To specify the section of the discussion on the talk page, use {{POV-check|talk page section name}}.

--Slacker (talk) 17:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Why are you so afraid of a simple POV-check tag if there is nothing POV in the section? Where do I start? Undo weight/coverage of the post-Islamic history, the claim that Bahrain was an "independent state" in 1700's, and....let the neutral editors review the section and judge for themselves. --07fan (talk) 18:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Nobody is afraid of anything. I welcome a review by a third party. In fact, I would love to have it reviewed by a neutral, thoughtful editor. I wouldn't contribute to WP if I didn't want my contributions to be read, and I think feedback is important to eliminate errors (that's the point of a wiki). What I am afraid of is that nobody would show up to review it and the tag would just stay there indefinitely to discredit the article, since I couldn't find any trace of a "NPOV reviewing process" on WP. Maybe I was mistaken and there is a pipeline that the article is going through and the neutral editor will show up, although an admin has just told me that I might have to look for a reviewer myself.

You still need to give specific reasons because the editors who contributed here as well as the readers deserve to know what the alleged POV issues are. Also, the "reviewer" whom you are soliciting needs to know what you are objecting to.

Another problem is your assumption of bad faith on the part of fellow editors without justification. I'm sure the two articles contain errors; that is natural. However, an error is not necessarily due to bias, so you should first try to correct errors without impugning other editors' good faith and accusing them of "tendentious editing" and "cherry-picking" as you did here. You're allegation of POV over undue weight is unwarranted also. People write about things they have knowledge about; perhaps the reason the pre-Islamic period is not covered as much as you'd like is due to the fact that no one with enough knowledge and interest in the subject has decided to add that information (although that section was recently expanded by the same editor you accused of being tendentious). If some editors were trying to delete or abbreviate the pre-Islamic section, then I would say you had a case for "undue weight" PORV. Also, perhaps you should consider that most of Bahrain's recorded history occurred after Islam, and so there is simply more literature on the subject. It's very common for some periods in a country's history to be better covered than others in an encyclopedia article and it doesn't mean it was written in bad faith. As for the claim that Bahrain became an independent emirate in 1783, that is attributed to a very reputable academic source. If you have a reliable academic source with an alternate viewpoint, you're welcome to add it. I don't see how it's justified to say the article is biased without first attempting to include this alternate theory. -- Slacker (talk) 21:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

This is exactly what the tag is for, to get the attention of the third-party users who are familiar with the topic. There is nothing wrong with my rational, the issue of independence in 1700's is disputed, yet presented as a fact, and large portions of pre-Islamic history have been neglected or suppressed while the minor events in post-Islamic history (ie Saudi tribal incursions) have been given undo weight. Please do not remove the tag, I am merely asking third-party users who are interested or familiar with the topic, yet not associated with the topic, to review it for neutrality, as most of the editors who have constructed the section in its current form such as User:Arabbi, User:Slackerlawstudent and User:Dilmun‎ , appear to be from from an Arab background (either Saudi Arabia or Bahrain). Please do not remove the tag. --07fan (talk) 17:39, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Why should we take seriously your claims that these issues are disputed when you have not pointed to a single reliable source? And why should we defer to your personal opinion that the war with the Saudis (which you inaccurately describe as a "tribal incursion") was minor when these events are documented by a reliable source? If you think some events are not covered adequately, add the info with sources. That is not a POV issue; in the absence of deliberate dilution of certain aspects, you can't attribute the lack of coverage to bias. In fact, I revise my edits here regularly, and I was going to add material from Cole and Encyclopedia Iranica about the Safavid period, but your ad-hominmen approach makes it very difficult to engage in constructive work. -- Slacker (talk) 18:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Please read WP:AGF, I have already raised some questions and now we should wait for uninvolved editors who are not associated with the topic, to review it for neutrality. If I wanted to simply dispute the page or put into question the accuracy of the content altogether, I'd have used "POV" or "totally disputed" tags, not a simple POV-chck tag which is meant to to improve the article by inviting uninvolved editors to review and improve the section in question. I just don't see why you're being so defensive, if you don't mind third-party users double-checking the section. Oh and Saudis were just a tribe back then, not a recognized state.--07fan (talk) 19:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

According to the admin Avraham's reply on my talk page, I can ask another editor to conduct the review that you seek. May I do so, or would you prefer to ask someone yourself? Your call. -- Slacker (talk) 19:48, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

That;s not how POV-check works. Solicitation of "random users" who may or may not be familiar with the topic or neutral, is not appropriate, I'd rather wait for neutral third-party editors to review the section on their own, without being solicited. --07fan (talk) 20:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I wasn't solicited, I just saw Slacker's petition on the Village Pump, policy section, about wheter the POV-check was being used correctly, so I'd say that I do qualify as neutral third-party, and I am not reviewing the article, I am reviewing the tag usage. --Enric Naval (talk) 21:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Enric Naval qualifies as a uninvolved third party editor since there's no record of him being party to this debate before. Having reviewed the discussion on the tag at both the talk page here and at the Village pump, Enric Naval deleted the tag. There's therefore no justification for keeping the tag now.

Dilmun (talk) 20:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Enric Naval never said that he was familiar with the topic, do not remove the tag until the section has been voluntarily reviewed by 3rd party editors who are familiar with the topic. --07fan (talk) 21:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Would an RfC be an approrpriate solution here? -- Slacker (talk) 21:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, now that's an appropriate venue to solicit opinion of neutral editors who are familiar with the topic. I will file a request tomorrow. --07fan (talk) 21:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

See my comments about the tag on Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)/Archive 42#Policy_on_POV_tagging. I'm happy that you reached an agreement about the matter. --Enric Naval (talk) 22:20, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

bedouins?

There are no bedouins in bahrain, and there never were, bedou are nomads, and they exist in many countries, but not on the tiny island, and while some bahrainis claim to be bedouin, theres not any proof of their claims, and the traditional bedouin families of the region, from qatar and saudi arabia, find the notion of bahraini bedouins, for the most part, laughable. For example, AL-Mannai ARE NOT bedouin, even their article says that they made money from pearl diving, therefore, they arnet nomads. Families like Al-Marri and Al-Hajri, bedouins without a doubt, are not and never were present in bahrain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shamalyguy (talk • contribs) 15:07, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

I think what's meant here is that these clans (Dawasir, Nuaim, Manani'a) were of bedouin origin before they crossed over to Bahrain. -- Slacker (talk) 21:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

trying to correct festivities

I saw this edit[8] which appeared to be incorrect on first sight, and I tried to mend it here. The problem is that I'm not sure of the exact differences between the two holidays. Can someone more knowledgeable on the matter take a look at it? --Enric Naval (talk) 17:28, 11 May 2008 (UTC).

A proud Bahraini's Opinion

archiving WP:SOAPBOX comments, please make specific suggestments to improve the article, see WP:TALK
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
In response for some harsh words on the culture of Bahrain, I am a Sunni Persian and still think that I need to roam everywhere to correct some information of some people who still can't Distinguish between the original Sunni Persians and the real Huwala! There are sunni Persians here and they are proud of it, while the others because of some racists and religious believes went to stick themselves with the “original” Huwala arabs since both had the same Islamic faith and were both immigrating from the same Country which was Persia – now days Iran -. Those People are called khodmoni, and btw, to the person who has wrote that the Persian Language is heavily influenced by Arabic, this is not true. Yes I agree with you that in some areas it is influenced, but not that much. If there was a dialect which was so much influenced it is the Shia Persian’s one, not the Sunni. The Sunni Persians uses a very pure old Persian Dialect which is still even makes Iranian’s themselves jealous of it! Why? Because the people whom speak this dialect come from villages very far away from the centre, and big towns of Iran which received the Islamic religion more heavily and therefore had a big influence from it. Second of all who told you that the Sunni Persians are only from Bastak and azeri?!! The discussion of this subject is very very big, and it only depends on the family culture whether they were so attached to their original blood and culture or not. The bakeries for example dear writer aren’t neither from bastak or azeri as you say! And I challenge anyone who deny that they are Persians! For more information on sunni Persians and the controversy surrounding their original culture, you either have to read my big article with the discussion of it, or ask the old Persian people in Bahrain! All of these ethnic shifting has happened because of the business and power which was and still in the hands of the Arabs in our country or to some religious pressure and believes! I still feel surprised that many people from my dear country think that only Persians in Bahrain are Shia or maybe Sunni Bastaki or maybe from some unknown families which is totally wrong! I sometimes wonder about something, why changing your culture?! And why not go to visit your original village back at Iran to ask and make research of your heritage?! Why stick to some books written by some people who wanna make their own benefit of it! And by the way, being Persian Bahraini, does not mean you are bad, or with iran or your shia or something, you are only a descendant of the Aryan race and that’s it! This Island was always a mixture of ethnicities and civilizations thru thousand of years! And I really feel upset when still someone mentions that this was Iran’s land and was under the Shah’s power, though it is true, but that Period is gone and you can feel nothing proud of it, because this land was also under the Portuguese and the British power. So why bringing this subject now and again? We are only explain the history and cultures here, and please, I have corrected that the huwala have some original Persians (who attached themselves to it) and that the Ajams were originally one when they came here, they were only Shia and Sunni! And they still exists in Iran and I myself have visited the Village there to ask and do research since this subject was a controversial for a long time. Thanks anyways for this article about our beloved country and I still think it can be expanded. For any further discussion, here is my e-mail h.totti10@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by H. Totti (talk • contribs) 12:55, 1 June 2008

See the edits to the article [9] relevant to the archived discussion above --Enric Naval (talk) 13:13, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Shia population

The article states thats the Shia population is about 53 percent. All major sources state it is about 70 percent Shia.

This needs to be corrected. YAM (talk) 18:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by YAM (talk • contribs) 18:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC) 

that is in fact true, I have looked at other sources and they are contradictoriy. There need to be at least a discussion regarding this dispution. I in fact put the demographic section up for dispution.74.12.104.195 (talk) 05:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Human Rights

There needs to be a section or article about human rights in Bahrain with respect to the repressed majority population.

33% sunni 66% shia = or = 66% sunni 33%shia

NO body know (because the is not any statistics data from government about that The two references 75 and 76 are worthless. One link is dead the other one is a blog! There are no statistics whatsoever in these two links. I don't see any unofficial sources "such as the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office." You either remove these numbers or fix them. At least alert the reader by asking for a valid reference. Asd1815 (talk) 05:21, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Yes, the reference is to a blog and it's incorrect, Government official says Sunni in Bahrain 63% in 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldoy (talk • contribs) 19:03, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

from Central Informatics Organisation the is NO data about that (so from where this Numbers??!!)

Bahrain got its independence from Iran in 1971?

There's that heading on this article that says so (with no reference). As far as I know, in 1971 it was UK that withdrew from Bahrain. Before, Bahrain was part of "Trucial States" or something like that. But yea, I don't think that Bahrain got its independence from Iran. Never read something like that. So yea, I'll erase it. Rad vsovereign (talk) 14:57, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Liberation of Bahrain?

The title "1783 Bani Utbah liberation of Bahrain" seems to be Not NPOV . What about changing it to "1783 rising of Bani Utbah " ? that is more neutral . --Alborz Fallah (talk) 17:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Is the map messed up?

All I see is a grey square on a pure white background. Browser issue or picture issue? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.190.29.150 (talk) 04:36, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

(Sorry if this comment isn't being made right - it's my first comment on an article, and I'm a little bit confused by the directions.) The square on the world map should correspond to the edges of the enlarged smaller map. Ben Isecke (talk) 16:28, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

One Way Glass

The article mentions changes in building laws to make people fit one way glass to buildings to stop people seeing out. This is an unusual claim and the reference provided no longer exists at address linked to. The only other reference to this I can find on the internet is another Wikipedia article (Muharraq Goveronate) that states, again without a supporting reference, that a political party suggested this policy during an election.

Does anyone have a reference to support the claim that these building laws were actually enacted? MalachiK (talk) 09:54, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps we should remove it. This could be a possible vandalism act, because this article had a large vandalism-history and i just recently got it semi protected indefinitely. So once again, if you think that fact is wrong, and have enough supporting evidence for it, then i think we better remove it... Kind regards. Rehman (talk) 14:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I've removed it. If something is dubious, and is unreferenced, that is enough reason to remove it. carl bunderson (talk) (contributions) 04:30, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Persian Gulf vs. Arabian Gulf...

I believe that in this artical the name: "Persian Gulf", should be swapped for the name: "Arabian Gulf", because all Arab people refer this body of water as the: "خليج العربي" (Khaleej Al-Arabi), rather than the "خليج الفارس" (Khaleej Al-Faris), so when associating any Arab, or Gulf country with this body of water, the Arabian Gulf should be used. User:Salalah4life (talk) 12:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

You are right, in a way. The thing is, the article relating to that water-body is in-fact named as Persian Gulf, not Arabian Gulf. So its quite clear that the sea is actually called the Persian Gulf. But yet, i may be wrong. I suggest you discuss this with the authors of the Persian Gulf article, and see where it takes... Regards. Rehman (talk) 10:36, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia uses a unified form of naming that is concerned best with most common English usage.Internal changing of the names does not matters here , as in Iran , the name Arvandrud is more dominant than Shatt al-Arab , but in Wikipedia , the second word (Shatt al-Arab ) is the standard name in use .--Alborz Fallah (talk) 08:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Most of all, the name Persian Gulf is an established standard in English and most other languages in the world. Since this is the English Wikipedia and not its Arab version, only English standards should be used. And "Arabian Gulf" is no such standard. That's also the reason why the respective article is named Persian Gulf. Tajik (talk) 18:20, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

We don't have a queen in Bahrain

Hi, Please Edit the - Queen Sabika bint Ibrahim. We dont have a Queen. She is one of the King wives. In bahrain we have 3 mans:

1. The king: hamad Bin Isa Alkhalifa
2. Crown Prince: His Royal Highness Prince Salman Bin Hamad Bin Isa Al-Khalifa
3. The prime minster: Khalifa Bin Salman Alkhalifa

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Almosawi86 (talk • contribs) 12:38, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Bahrain is not smaller than King Fahd airport

King Fahd International Airport is 16 square km, it cannot possibly be larger than Bahrain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Idiopathic (talk • contribs) 20:43, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

According to this article itself, the airport is 780 km² (300 sq mi) is size, which is larger than Bahrain. Regards. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 01:49, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Hmm it doesn't look bigger here though

I agree the Bahrain Island is much bigger than King Fahad Airport, please remove such point — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldoy (talk • contribs) 19:02, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Amnesty International Report 2009 on Bahrain, a Non-Arab Country

Bahrain cannot be a member state of the Arab League, and Arabic cannot be the official language of the insular state. The indigenous majority speaks Farsi, adhere to Shia Islam, and cannot accept the Pan-Arabist tyranny that English colonial gangsters worked hard and for long to install via their stooges, namely the besotted, ignorant, barbaric and alien elements who migrated from the peninsula in order to be properly used by their anti-Islamic masters.

In the same way the entities formed in the Asiatic part of the Middle East after the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire and the rise of Kemal Ataturk in Turkey are all fake, and the various existing pseudo-states belong in fact to Turkey, Bahrain belongs to Iran. It is true that for a brief period of time, Bahrain belonged to the Ottoman Empire, but this was the result of the fact that Istanbul attempted to save parts of the Islamic world from the clutches of the criminal Anglo-French colonials after the collapse of the Qajar imperial dynasty of Iran.

In fact, the ethnic background of the Bahrainis is Aramaean, as following many millennia of Sumerian, Elamite and Babylonian presence, Aramaean merchants made of the island an important outpost in the sea route to China already during the late Axhaemenid times. The island was inhabited by Aramaeans for approximately a millennium, down to the moment of the Islamic explosion.

Nestorian Christians constituted the outright majority of the local population in the first decades of Islam; this in itself bears witness to Aramaean presence and identity. Within the vast Sassanid Empire of Iran, the Nestorians were all Aramaeans or Central Asiatic populations, because the Persians never accepted Oriental Christianity.

Today, the basic issues that determine the sociopolitical developments in the colonial tyranny of Bahrain are similar with the problems existing in Qatar, Kuwait and the UAE, namely historical identity, cultural and religious individuality, linguistic integrity, and social representativeness. As long as these critical issues are not dealt with, Bahrain will remain a Pan-Arabist tyranny imposed by an alien dynasty that proved to be the puppets of the enemies of both, Islam and Oriental Christianity.

I herewith republish the Amnesty International report 2009 on Bahrain that illuminates some of the dramas lived in the fake model of progress and prosperity, the insular Hell of Bahrain.

Amnesty International Report 2009 on Bahrain

http://thereport.amnesty.org/en/regions/middle-east-north-africa/bahrain

Head of state: King Hamad bin ´Issa Al Khalifa

Head of government: Shaikh Khalifa bin Salman Al Khalifa

Death penalty: retentionist

Population: 766,000

Life expectancy: 75.2 years

Under-5 mortality (m/f): 14/14 per 1,000

Adult literacy: 86.5 per cent

Amnesty International Report 2009 on Bahrain

The authorities failed adequately to investigate allegations of torture and other ill-treatment of detainees. Government critics were briefly detained and several websites were closed down. One person was executed. The government indicated it would decriminalize certain publishing offences, reduce legal discrimination against women and introduce other reforms.

Background

There were renewed, violent protests in March and April by members of the majority Shi´a population against what they alleged was discrimination, especially by the police and security forces, and the stalling of political reforms initiated by the King in 2001 and 2002. One policeman was killed and scores of people were arrested. Nineteen faced trial. Thirteen others who were charged with arson and rioting were among a group pardoned by the King in July but still detained at the end of the year. They were reported to have refused to sign official documents authorizing their release because they considered that all charges against them should be dropped unconditionally.

Excerpt

"A number of websites were closed because they contained articles criticizing the royal family..."

International scrutiny and legal developments

Bahrain´s human rights record was examined in April under the UN Human Rights Council´s system of Universal Periodic Review.

The government made significant human rights commitments, including to establish a national human rights institution, withdraw reservations made when Bahrain ratified certain human rights treaties, reform family and nationality laws, and adopt new legislation to protect women domestic workers and lift restrictions on the press.

Torture and other ill-treatment

Detainees held in connection with violent protests in the villages of Karzakhan and Demestan in March and April alleged that they were tortured and otherwise ill-treated by police. They said they were held incommunicado for a week during which they were made to stand for excessive periods, blindfolded and beaten.

Fifteen people arrested in December 2007 and accused of burning a police car and stealing a weapon alleged that they were tortured. Five were sentenced to between five and seven years´ imprisonment by the High Criminal Court in July; six were sentenced to one year in prison but were pardoned by the King; and four were acquitted. Among those acquitted was Mohammad Mekki Ahmad, aged 20, who was detained incommunicado for 12 days at the Criminal Investigations Department in Manama, where he alleges he was tortured by being suspended, beaten and subjected to electric shocks. A medical report, requested by the High Criminal Court and submitted to it in April, noted that some of the defendants had marks on their bodies which might have been caused by torture. The government failed to order an independent investigation into the torture allegations.

Freedom of expression

The government proposed to amend the 2002 Press and Publications Law to remove imprisonment as a penalty for offences such as criticizing the King and "inciting hatred of the regime". The Shura (Consultative) Council added amendments in May. All the amendments were submitted to the House of Representatives.

In June, Abdullah Hassan Bu-Hassan was detained for three days in connection with his writings in The Democrat, published by the Democratic National Action Society. The same month, seven contributors to the Awal website and al-Wifaq Islamic Society´s newsletter were briefly detained and accused of "inciting hatred and insulting the regime". A number of websites were closed because they contained articles criticizing the royal family and the government.

In November, the Interior Minister was reported to have announced that Bahraini nationals, including parliamentarians and NGO members, would be required to seek advance authorization before attending meetings abroad to discuss Bahrain´s internal affairs, and that those who failed to do so could be imprisoned or fined.

In May 2010 Al-Jazeera was forbidden to operate after reporting on negative events in Bahrain, not to the liking of the government. The government claimed that Al-Jazeera was Zionist. Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1980191.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.95.8.191 (talk) 13:54, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Death penalty

A Bangladeshi national, Mizan Noor Al Rahman Ayoub Miyah, convicted of murdering his employer, was executed in August.

In December, Bahrain abstained on a UN General Assembly resolution calling for a worldwide moratorium on executions.

Amnesty International visits

An Amnesty International delegate visited Bahrain in October and met government officials, parliamentarians, human rights activists, journalists, former detainees and lawyers. In November an Amnesty International delegate attended a follow-up meeting hosted by the Bahraini government on the implementation of the recommendations of the UN Universal Periodic Review session in April.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/108663 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.234.33.210 (talk) 10:51, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

No Reliable Sources

This article only seems to have three sources, one un-referenced at the end of the article, only via in-text referencing. Advise on whether I should add the Refimprove template: {{Refimprove}} --Aviationalyours (talk) 14:34, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done It can't hurt to have one, though I'm not sure how you counted only 3 ref's, {{Reflist}} is showing 93 inline citations at the moment. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 14:48, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

That's true, I checked the article and it showed 93 references. Which is really weird since a few hours ago I could only count two in {{Reflist}} and three in the body (in text referencing.) I assume that was a server glitch, my computer not properly loading the page or simply my human error. Aviationalyours (talk) 18:21, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Hello. I've removed the tag; gone through the article and dont see any instance where a citation is needed. So far, it looks like there are enough citations. If you still feel like it's not enough, please tag (the citation needed tag) inline, so its more easier to find what needs citation. Thanks. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 13:10, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Neutral Point of View

Article should be flagged for writing that sounds sarcastic and ill informed under the Politics heading. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 02:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

 Done. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 02:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Area Field

Where is the Area field? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.49.23.150 (talk) 02:26, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Arafat day?

Under the Holidays topic - Arafa is not quite the same as Arafat. 124.181.33.214 (talk) 04:35, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Summer weather grossly underestimated

I am an expat living in Bahrain, and I can confirm that the climate report on this wiki is grossly underestimating summer temperatures. The article states "summer temperatures may reach about 35 °C (95 °F)." These lowball statistics are often distributed by Bahrain's tourism ministry as not to scare away potential tourists. In fact, the summer temperature in Bahrain averages about 43 C (110 F) and occasionally reaches as high as 50 C (122 F). A simple search of Weather.com will confirm these readings. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Apstyle (talk • contribs) 10:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Also, if you got to climate on the Bahrain page, it says it is located to the "west of mainland Saudi Arabia"... It's to the east! Fix this! Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.188.105.25 (talk) 23:30, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done for both. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 00:58, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Bahrain Vision 2030

How come there is absolutely no mention of the Bahrain Economic Vision 2030 anywhere in this article? http://www.2030.bh & http://www.bahrainedb.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bahrainvision2030 (talk • contribs) 09:10, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

One of the links you provided (2030.bh) doesn't work, although perhaps it is a technical problem, so I will try again later. I read the other link and the associated PDF - all I can see are plans and aims but nothing concrete. If you can find some evidence that any of these plans have been or are being put into action, then feel free to boldly add it yourself but bear in mind that it should be just a short mention together with a reliable source. Green Giant (talk) 10:28, 30 August 2010 (UTC)