Talk:Israel–South Sudan relations

Recent Developments

So recently, the South Sudanese said they would put their embassy in Jerusalem ( a big departure from usual practice), and the Deputy Speaker of their Parliament said that South Sudan considers Israel to be like a "Big Brother" to South Sudan. I think this should be mentioned in the article. Anyone want me to be the opposite of lazy and provide references? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 22:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Why is Gaza and West Bank part of Israel according to the map?

Why is Gaza and West Bank part of Israel according to the map? The recognized part of Israel was correct until a change was made on 4 September 2011.

Look at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Israel_South_Sudan_Locator.png. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IRISZOOM (talk • contribs) 14:24, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I dont remember Palestine ever gaining independence from Israel. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 01:20, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Does not matter because West Bank and the Gaza Strip (easier to call it just "Gaza" thougt it actually is two different thing) is not a part of Israel. Israel is just the occupying power and that is a fact. --IRISZOOM (talk) 13:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit warring

Could you explain the nature of the disputes about the article, and discuss it here instead of edit-warring? AnonMoos (talk) 10:27, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

I carefully copyedited the article, added requested references and clarifications where there were tags, created new sections, removed unsourced OR from the lead, and added a large amount of new data based on reliable sources. All these changes were accompanied by edit summaries explaining the nature of the edits. I do not comprehend why attempts are being made to restore an old version of the article after tagged "problems" were addressed and the article has been substantially upgraded--Geewhiz (talk) 19:25, 11 February 2012 (UTC).

There is no warring per BRD. The Bold changes were reverted and should then be discussed here instead calling edits that you dont prefer "vandalism" And nothing was addressed. Per BRD discuss your reverts which are not vandalism! The claims of restroting a cleaned" version while removing another as "Vandalism" are not AGF by any stretch of the imagination! Further the pertinent edits ere readded. so i doint remove anything and blindly at that!Lihaas (talk) 10:25, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

lihaas - i have been following this for the last day or two - what is your objection? most of this seems pretty straighforward, based on the actual words in the RS. Soosim (talk) 11:07, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

The initial edit (BOLD as it may hae been) inexplicably remove conted citing "vandalism" and then was redone without reason. In that case the user should duly explain his changes (particularly that which remove other info). As for his good edits i didn in fact duly add it back. and withreason too (see revision history)Lihaas (talk) 01:53, 13 February 2012 (UTC)