Talk:Scouting and Guiding in Western Sahara

Kun Musta'idan x20

What's the point in duplicating exactly the same paragraph in 20 articles? Also, whoever cares what's the Arabic translation for "Be Prepared", will of course look in that article, and not in Sahraoui Scout Association.

And what's the point in providing the Arabic translation of the word "boyscout"? This is not a dictionary. --tyomitch 15:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

A more constructive solution would be to move the paragraph to WOSM-Arab Region. The paragraph is equally relevant to all the members of the Region, and its article is already linked from all the members' articles. Is that good enough? --tyomitch 17:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I have to disagree about putting it in the region article. Each association should have its own info. But I also agree a little variety would be good. I suggest leaving the info in the association articles and varying the text in each some.Rlevse 23:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Tyomitch, I truly appreciate your energy, but that suggestion is actually not "good enough". First, it goes against the format of the 160+ other national articles; second, the Scout Motto is not specific nor particularly pertainant to the Arab Scout Region; and third, the removals do not give the reader which languages or variants are used in that particular country. Please leave them as they are. Besides, there has been some discussion about dividing up or renaming Be Prepared, as it is too much a catchall to be of use to most. We very much appreciate your contributions, but unless you'd like to join the Wikipedia:WikiProject Scouting, we'd prefer to let those with some connection to the topic be the arbiters of what is noteworthy in each article. Now, if you _do_ want to add the Arabic to the Scout articles for Palestine and Syria, we would really appreciate your contribution (and thanks for the ones you did already, that's a lot of work). In thanks, Chris 01:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

POV edits by user:juiced lemon

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 10:07, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Your retaliatory proposal for deletion just underscores your lack of ability to cite your own sources. Grow up. Chris 10:35, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

You have not sourced this article according to your reputable source. You could have cited the Bible as well. --Juiced lemon 10:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't see you sourcing anything to back up your claims. While you're at it, learn English. Chris 10:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

This is a nonsense demand. Nobody can prove that something doesn't exist. It belongs to you to prove that this association exists. --Juiced lemon 10:57, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• Rebleguys2 is correct, a prod can be removed for any reason, including merely objecting to it. Both Juiced lemon and Chris need to provide verifiable sources for their claims and both also let the situation settle down or they both could be blocked for edit warring. Rlevse 11:36, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know that a prod could be removed for no reason. Notice that the title of this section is POV and personal attack. --Juiced lemon 12:59, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Note that right on the prod tag itself it says it can be removed "if you otherwise object to deletion of the article for any reason". Rlevse 13:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Look at how he managed to interpret it: [1]. I, for one, am thoroughly amused. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 13:30, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

TotallyDisputed

This article contains mainly stereotypical informations. Other informations cannot be attributed to reliable sources, in particular name and logo of the association, which could be fictitious, and the location of the scout activities. The article links this web page Movimiento Scout Católico, which contains informations regarding to a scout organization which doesn't concern this article. Any association can have any activity in any location on the Earth. --Juiced lemon 12:04, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

There is a surprising similarity between 40px and an image in Scout Populaire Casa-Anfa (Anfa is an area in Casablanca, Morocco). --Juiced lemon 14:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

The wording on the little banner is different, and all of those symbols are so universal, I think it's too much of a stretch to think we can take that as evidence to go either way. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 14:38, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Some facts

1. The Spanish Scouts hold contacts with the Moroccan Scoutisme Hassania Marocain, member of the Fédération Nationale du Scoutisme Marocain. [2], [3]
2. The UJSARIO has decided to start a scout movement, but it is unclear if any groups exist: [4], [5] The linked homepage of the UJSARIO is actually down. The newest version accessible via Wayback machine mentions a "Movimiento saharaui de Exploradores" which translates to "Sahraoui Scouting Movement" [6].
3. This movement is collaborating with the OJE, a Spanish Scout-like organization [7].
4. The embassy of the RASD in Algeria uses "Movimiento de Exploradores saharaui" and translates this as "Scouts" [8]. This seems to be the correct name of the movment (according to official sources as well as Google).

Hope this helps on discussing this article. --jergen 19:44, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your search. It confirms that there are scout activities:

* in Western Sahara, in connection with the Fédération Nationale du Scoutisme Marocain, an organization of Morocco

* in Algeria, in connection with UJSARIO, an organization of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.

Grounds to current foreign relations between Algeria and Morocco, this article unlikely concerns both activities in Western Sahara and activities in Algeria. Therefore:

• case 1: the authors of the article don't know the location of the scout activities: deletion of the article
• case 2: the location of the scout activities is in Western Sahara: deletion of the article, the scout activities in Western Sahara may be mentioned in Fédération Nationale du Scoutisme Marocain
• case 3: the location of the scout activities is in Algeria: in this case, this change and this template change are necessary.

So, without answer from the authors during the next 48 hours, I'll request the deletion of this article. --Juiced lemon 18:43, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that a deletion is necessary - a rewrite would do it (your proposal #3 including some more corrections). My proposals:

• Rename this article to "Movimiento de Exploradores saharaui" (afaik there is no English translation), make the changes in proposal #3, add some input on the connections with French an Spanish Scouting and on the history of the organization (this is seemingly the heir of the pioneer movement within the UJSARIO).
• Correct the redirect Scouting in Western Sahara to Fédération Nationale du Scoutisme Marocain.
• Introduce an new redirect Scouting in the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic pointing to "Movimiento de Exploradores saharaui".

Comments? --jergen 06:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

There is a logo with some Arabic writing in the article. That could be a hint to determine the subject of the article. In cases 1 and 2, I should prefer a new page (not a renaming) for "Movimiento de Exploradores saharaui". --Juiced lemon 08:57, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Working on sourcing at present-badge and information were provided to my be participants involved, just a matter of getting the sourcing lined up. Western Sahara is a separate location from Morocco, and the status is disputed. This shouldn't redirect anywhere else, as there are Scouts on the land area of Western Sahara. If warranted, I would support a rename. Chris 21:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, you don't understand the problem (or you act as you don't). Therefore, I have requested the deletion of the article. --Juiced lemon 11:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

My two cents Since the SADR controls part of Western Sahara, making Scouting in Western Sahara redirect to Fédération Nationale du Scoutisme Marocain would be POV.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Koavf (talk • contribs)

I see. You consider that the SADR could employ Sahrawi kids to clear mine fields as scout activities. If the redirection of Scouting in Western Sahara is a problem, it only means that we don't need this page. --Juiced lemon 15:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

What? I seriously have no idea what you're talking about. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 16:34, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

• This reaction means nothing, simply nothing. wikima 19:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Meaningless? So was yours, Wikima. Why are you stalking me on these talk pages? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

Sahraoui Scout Association → Scouting in Western Sahara — over the course of research to source this article, several editors have discovered multiple groups and organizations serving the same purpose, none with international recognition, so this is a more inclusive name —Chris 19:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Support Might as well make this an overview; this particular organization will probably remain a stub for the foreseeable future. If sometime, somehow there is enough information to flesh it out into a full article, it can be expanded from there. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 19:47, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
• Support per above and I think it'd make it less volatile.Rlevse 19:48, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• Support and, per Justin, create separate article when enough info is present. —Anas ^talk? 21:06, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

• Immediate Delete! - Everyone can create unsourced trash. Wikipedia does not need it - wikima 20:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Right Apparently, you misunderstand the purpose of this move survey and the fact that this just survived an AfD nomination. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 21:08, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

• Immediate discuss, like a rational person! - I think it should be moved, but it should be far different from articles like "Scouting in Morocco," "Scouting in Greece," and "Scouting in Argentina," and it could just be a temporary fix. There certainly is sourced evidence for "Scouting in Western Sahara," but Western Sahara is a region, not a political entity. The WOSM's world map certainly outlines the area commonly referred to as Western Sahara, but unless I'm missing something, that doesn't mean they necessarily recognize it as such; rather, they don't recognize Scouting there. Moroccan Scouts do recognize that area as theirs, though the WOSM doesn't entirely recognize Moroccan Scouts' claims. And it doesn't look like the WOSM recognizes the SADR organization at all, as far as I know. But, anyway, the nation-based articles should end up being Scouting in Morocco and Scouting in the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, as that's how we conventionally write about these national organizations. There's certainly overlap — [9] confuses me, as I'm finding it interesting that SADR-affiliated Scouts had something to do in El Aaiun, west of the Moroccan Wall and the Free Zone — but convention elsewhere is that we base our templates on national organizations, and according to the evidence so far, there clearly isn't a national Western Sahara organization. Scouting in Western Sahara could be an article detailing the special circumstances of Scouting in Morocco, Scouting in the Sahrawai Arab Democratic Republic, and possibly even with some input from Scouting in Mauritania and Scouting in Algeria — certainly it'll be a touchy and difficult article to build. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 22:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
• comment My suggestion to move the article to Scouting in Western Sahara, and not treat as an integral part of Morocco, is the land area is not internationally accepted to be part of Morocco. WOSM makes no claim to how they view the land area, but they also don't color the map as belonging to any neighbors, it just says "other situations". Also bear in mind WOSM is but one (not the sole and not the definitive) international Scout movement, and the "Scouting in... " articles are inclusive of other orgs. And as yet there is no nation to speak of, just the disputed land area. The claimant countries all have their own articles, this one just needs to be about the situation for this land area. I appreciate your input and hope you can see why I have done as I did. Chris 22:40, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I don't agree at all with treating Scouting in Western Sahara as a national-level article. "Scouting in Western Sahara" can cover the area and its unique situation, but it can't be treated like the rest. No political claimant says there is a "Western Sahara" — there is Morocco and the SADR. There is no de facto, on-the-ground existence of "Western Sahara" — there are the Southern Territories, the Free Zone, and the like. There's no source for the existence of a "Western Sahara" Scouting organization — just Moroccan Scouts, UJSARIO Scouts, and the like. "Scouting in Western Sahara" can describe the situation, but saying that it is a national-level entity is unsourced and violates NPOV, both ignoring Morocco's claim and the existence of the SADR and purporting the existence of a third, "Western Sahara" body, which simply doesn't exist. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 22:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
    • I think you may be reading too much in that is unintended. We have dozens of articles on "Scouting in" places that are not national entities, but are instead subnational or disputed territories. No implication is made that there is a nation there, just that there is Scouting there. I would direct you to Scouting in the Antarctic which illustrates that nobody is making a national claim here just by the name of the article. We can't put it in Morocco, nor any of the other neighbors, it's simply its own case and warrants separation, whatever the situation may be. This is an exception, and doesn't need so much read into it. There is an article on Western Sahara, it shows up on maps, it has nascent Scouting, it merits an article separate from its claimants. Chris 23:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
      • But Scouting in the Antarctic doesn't make any such claim — it's all about the Argentine Scouts, so that article precisely illustrates my point. We should treat Scouting in Western Sahara like we do Scouting in Antarctica — as a region, not as a national entity, like we imply through Template:ArabScout (it's not potentially a member of the Arab Scout region — at least I don't see any sources for this claim) and a mention of a "National Scout Organization" (there isn't, and there won't be). Scouting in the Antarctic doesn't try to do any of this. I certainly see disputed territories on other such templates (Republic of China, for example), but those aren't really the same — there are claims to the existence of a Republic of China, but there aren't any to a "Western Sahara" — only by/to Morocco and the SADR. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 00:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
        • Then the solution is to remove it from the template. I still say you are reading implications where there are none being made-if you notice, Aruba, French Polynesia and Hong Kong also have spaces on those templates. Again, no one is claiming there is a nation in this. Chris 00:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
          • French Polynesia is a French overseas country with its own Scouting organization — Western Sahara isn't a political entity, nor does it have its own Scouting organization. Aruba is a centralized unitary state of the Kingdom of the Netherlands with its own Scout council — again, Western Sahara isn't a political entity, nor does it have its own Scouting organization. Hong Kong is a special administrative region with its own Scout association — again, Western Sahara isn't comparable. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 00:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• I have already repeatedly said, in no time during the course of writing any of this, have I claimed that it was its own political entity. Show me where I've said otherwise. What, specifically, do you want from me? Chris 00:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Not claiming a nation? Take the lede: "Western Sahara ... is one of 35 countries ..." and "...no National Scout Organization which is yet a member ..." both imply a national organization. Then, all of the bullet points deal with Scouting affiliated with Spain and the Canary Islands, with Morocco, with the Polisario Front and the SADR, with France, with Algeria, with Italy, with Poland, and with Wales. Yes, there is Scouting on the ground in Western Sahara, but the lede certainly speaks otherwise. Then, we have the "Notes" section, which I don't really care about either way, though definitively claiming that the international Scouting movement takes a neutral position is certainly misleading. Then, we have the template at the bottom, where "Western Sahara" as a potential member certainly does imply some kind of potential "Western Sahara" Scouting or political organization, which simply doesn't exist like it does in Aruba, French Polynesia, and Hong Kong. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 01:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
    • Now that I see specifics, I will address it. Sometimes one gets too close to see what the issue itself is. The bullet points, though, have to stay, they're all the references. Chris 01:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
• Move info to the respective pages then delete this article - Chris says "no one is claiming there is a nation in this". Actually user koavf has already created a Scouting in the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic which wrongly redirects to Sahraoui Scout Association. Now that there is a Scouting in the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic, the SADR specific scouting that takes place in the "Free zone" should be moved there, while the Moroccan Scouting activities taking place in "the Southern provinces" should be mentionned in the Moroccan scouting page. After the existence of Scouting in Morocco and Scouting in the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic, this article is useless and will most certainly be a battlefield for all POV pushing. Save the hassle and get rid of it now.--A Jalil 01:31, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

I have fixed the redirect to point to the new title Scouting in Western Sahara. Are there any more POV issues I need to address that perhaps I was overlooking, or can we move on now? Chris 00:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

• Move info to the respective pages then delete this article. The destination pages are Scouting in Morocco and Scouting in the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic. “Scouting in Western Sahara” would be only a pretext to establish a POV redirection from Scouting in the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic. Associate Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic subjects with Western Sahara subjects is the obsession of some users. --Juiced lemon 13:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Requested removal of POV tag

Now that this article has survived the AfD and is fully sourced, and will soon be moved to a more inclusive name, I propose that we can reasonably, and therefore should, remove the POV tag. Chris 21:59, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Not in its current shape. See my note above. — Rebelguys2 ^talk 22:15, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with what Rebelguys2 said above. There are reasons to keep the POV tag.--A Jalil 01:34, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

City Name Laayoune

POV editors keep editing to put in the Spanish transliteration of the Arabic name of the city. The clear dominant English language is Laayoune (See cites on Talk page to Ency. Brittanica, Reuters, Lonely Planet, US State Department - all NPOV sources ) - standard for Wikipedia is NPOV standard English usage (e.g. Mecca versus Makkah). Usage of the Spanish transliteration is entirely associated with a certain political tendency and does not match the clear NPOV dominant English usage. 11:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC).

See the full Wikipage on Laayoune: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laayoune and its background. collounsbury (talk) 11:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

@Collounsbury: Watch who you're calling a POV editor. Look at the edit history dates. When you were reverted, it was two weeks before the article itself was moved. Do a little research next time before mudslinging. You look like a jackass when you don't. Oh, and WP:AGF... have a nice day.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 14:53, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Spare me the pious idiocy. The basis of the name issue was established far back. collounsbury (talk) 12:57, 9 October 2016 (UTC)