Talk:Somaliland/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Contested assertions

Soupforone please explain what the 'contested assertions' you keep referring to may be [1], and by whom are they contested? Kzl55 (talk) 15:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Mohamed Haji Ingiriis and Chris Mullin's assertion that the government clampdown against the Somali National Movement was an "Isaaq genocide" or "Hargeisa holocaust". Those are contested assertions so they should be not be stated in Wikipedia's voice per WP:WIKIVOICE. Also, the toponym on the Silk Road map is clearly labeled Somalia [2]. Soupforone (talk) 15:22, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

And who are they contested by?

These assertions are not contested by reliable sources. As per a United Nations investigation [3], or per academic sources [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], or even reputable international media [14]. Kzl55 (talk) 15:55, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Those links claim that the government clampdown was against a clan, not that assertions to that effect are uncontested; many more assert that the government clampdown was against a rebel group whose membership primarily hailed from that clan (ex. [15]). This can be quantified through Google Ngrams, which indicates that both terms have little scholarly currency (zero Ngrams) compared to Somali National Movement [16]. Soupforone (talk) 04:11, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

You keep making claims that the genocide is contested without providing any evidence. The links above are a small selection of examples of the discussion of Isaaq genocide in reliable sources as per WP:GNG, more can be provided if needed. Reliable sources confirm the government targeted Isaaq people, there is no contest there in scholarly output. You keep conflating the Somali National Movement which was a group and the systematic government-sanctioned killing of Isaaq civilians, this is false because the government killed Isaaq civilians in places where there was no SNM presence (like Berbera, Erigavo, Mogadishu and others). When a United Nations investigation concludes that a genocide was "conceived, planned and perpetrated by the Somali Government against the Isaaq people" [17], and most reliable sources discussing the subject also confirm as much, coupled with coverage by reputable international news outlets, then you really can not claim it is contested.

The same source you are quoting (International Crisis Group) had this to say about the subject (emphasis mine):

Successful assaults by the SNM against Hargeysa and Bur’o were answered with indiscriminate bombardment, deliberate targeting of Isaaq civilians and mass executions, which cost over 50,000 lives and prompted an exodus of over half a million refugees to Ethiopia and internal displacement of a similar number. Hargeysa, the Northern capital was about 90 per cent destroyed and Bur’o 70 per cent. The government’s simultaneous practice of repopulating Isaaq communities with refugees from other clans was analogous to ethnic cleansing, and there were widespread and credible reports of war crimes. Although the Barre government also targeted other rebel groups and their supporters at different times between 1978 and 1991, no other Somali community faced such sustained and intense state-sponsored violence. [18]

And: "Evidence of war crimes in Somaliland has been documented by the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights and a forensic team from Physicians for Human Rights, as well as the Somaliland War Crimes Commission." Kzl55 (talk) 09:27, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

I did not indicate that "genocide is contested". What I wrote is that although those links claim that the government clampdown was against a clan, many more assert that the government clampdown was against a rebel group whose membership primarily hailed from that clan. That paper above (which is not the one I linked to) explains the apparent situation-- "Between 1983 and 1988, the government responded to the SNM threat with reprisals against civilians... successful assaults by the SNM against Hargeysa and Bur’o were answered with indiscriminate bombardment... although the Barre government also targeted other rebel groups and their supporters at different times between 1978 and 1991, no other Somali community faced such sustained and intense state-sponsored violence". Ergo, the SNM rebel group attacked the army, the army then indiscriminately bombarded the SNM's central cities, and this caused many civilian casualities. The paper also points out elsewhere that the SNM itself committed abuses against civilians-- in "a report commissioned by the U.S. State Department... Gersony also assigns the SNM responsibility for a number of abuses" [19]. As per WP:Wikivoice, the text should therefore be neutral and not favor any of these contested assertions. Soupforone (talk) 14:17, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

If you are not claiming the genocide is contested, then what exactly are you claiming to be contested?

The government was fighting against the SNM, the government also committed war crimes against Isaaq as people, killing Isaaq civilians as evidenced by the UN report and the significant coverage in reliable sources, including genocide scholarship.

In Annihilating Difference: The Anthropology of Genocide, Isaaq are listed under 'Genocides of Indigenous Peoples in the Twentieth Century [20].

In Gendercide and Genocide:

"Survivors of genocide, that is, people belonging to the group targeted for genocide. In Somalia this was the Issaq, in Rwanda the Tutsi, in Burundi the Hutu." [21].

In Genocides by the Oppressed:

"The assumption that genocide's victims belong to a less powerful group also needs to be destabilized. Is it not curious that minorities such as the Isaaq in Somali, Tutsi in Rwanda, or Jews in Nazi Germany, even when they were objectively rather subdued and politically marginalized, still seemed to so threatening to genocidal perpetrators that exterminating them seemed the only "solution"?" [22].

In Genocide, war crimes and the West:

"By 1988, the regime had committed a well-documented and genocidal 'ethnic cleansing' of large areas of Somalia" [23].

I am afraid reliable sources are very clear on the subject. The government attacked Isaaq civilians in locations where there was no SNM activity: "By all accounts, Berbera suffered some of the worst abuses of the war, even though the SNM never attacked Berbera. Victims in Berbera were killed in an extremely brutal fashion: most had their throats slit, then were shot." [24]. Again, you are conflating the two issues for no reason. Kzl55 (talk) 15:06, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Per WP:TALK, please try and keep your comments short and succinct. Anyway, I didn't indicate that there were no civilian casualties, or that some of the army attacks did not occur in areas where there was no rebel activity. What I wrote is that per WP:WIKIVOICE, "Hargeisa holocaust" and "Isaaq genocide" cannot be written in Wikipedia's voice because most of the scholarly canon indicates that the army's primary target was not a city population or clan per se, but rather a rebel group with a base in that city and clan. That includes the link above ("in every town, including Berbera, Borama, Sheikh and Erigavo which the SNM did not attack, Isaak men who the government feared would assist an SNM attack, especially members of the armed forces, businessmen, civil servants and elders, were arrested... Apparently frustrated by their efforts to defeat the SNM in direct combat, the army turned its firepower, including its air force and artillery, against the civilian population, causing predictably high casualties."). This is clear from Google Ngrams. The phrasing on the clampdown must therefore prioritize the SNM and be attributed to Ingriis and Mullin rather than presented in Wikipedia's voice. Soupforone (talk) 03:39, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

You keep making claims without providing any evidence. You also keep conflating the SNM (as a group) and the state-sponsored killing of Isaaq civilians which is a significant and notable event as per most reliable sources as cited above and WP:GNG, this is not contested by any reliable source, if you have any reliable sources contesting it please cite them. This is why it needs its own section separate from the SNM. The government attacked and killed nomads because they were Isaaq first, the alleged SNM connection was the Barre regime's excuse for targeting Isaaq civilians: "The existence of the SNM has provided a pretext for President Barre and his military deputies in the north to wage a war against peaceful citizens and to enable them to consolidate their control of the country by terrorizing anyone who is suspected of not being wholeheartedly pro-government"[25].

Also you keep referring to it as a clampdown when genocide scholarship refers to it as a genocide as per sources above.

@Cordless Larry:, any thoughts on this? Kzl55 (talk) 09:02, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

"Hargeisa holocaust" doesn't seem to be a widely used term, so I would avoid that. As for "genocide", Ingiriis refers to the killings as a "forgotten genocide", which suggests that not many other authors use the term. However, there do appear to be quite a few sources that do use it, including this by noted expert Alex de Waal. Perhaps this should be put to an RfC? Cordless Larry (talk) 12:15, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

The de Waal link is very useful, especially due to his expertise on the region, good find!

I think part of the problem is the inconsistent romanisation of the word Isaaq. De Waal for instance, writes it in Somali (as in Isaaq), so does the Chris Mburu in the UN investigation report [26], and Gregory Stanton [27], Lidwien Kaptenjins [28], Ingiriis [29], and Bahcheli [30]. But Israel Charny lists the name as Isaak [[31]], and so does Adam Jones [32]. There is also the use of Issaq, examples including The Guardian (Thousands of Somalis hit by genocide raids, Jan 7, 1989), Gendercide and Genocide [33], as well as HRW testimony [34] and the Genocide Prevention Advisory Netweork [35] . I have also seen the name written as Isak and Isaac. Kzl55 (talk) 13:38, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

As per WP:Wikivoice, the text should be neutral and not favor any of the sides and editors should Avoid stating opinions as facts., As Soupforone mentioned i think that point is valid, and any change from present text will be of lack NPOV. Somajeeste (talk) 12:09, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Suggesting that any possible change from the current wording would be non-neutral is hardly constructive, Somajeeste. There are problems with the current wording. For example "Mohamed Haji Ingiriis and Chris Mullin suggest that the clampdown by the Barre regime against the Hargeisa-based Somali National Movement targeted the Isaaq clan, to which most members of the SNM belonged. They therefore refer to the clampdown as the Isaaq genocide or Hargeisa holocaust" suggests that only Ingiriis and Mullin label the events genocide, whereas many other sources do (as evidenced by this discussion). Cordless Larry (talk) 08:33, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry in regards to the term "genocide" For those that did use the term "genocide", such as AlJazzera and Mohamed Haji Ingiriis "Forgotten Genocide", if you look how they use it it shows that wasn't their word choose (hence the quotation marks), but the words of others, such as victim's family members (see here: [36]. Aljazzera never even make reference to the incidents as "genocide" but rather that they were looking into the claim, hence the title "Investigating genocide in Somaliland". in addition, if you had read the Aljazzera article you would have noticed this : "Evidence that victims addressed from the same clan could indicate genocide, rather than mass-murder". Not only is this a criteria of a genocide,[37] overall the victims of the Barre government didn't hail from solely one clan but rather numerous other clans.[38] As such, these events completely fail to meet the criteria of a genocide. In fact, the Survival International News refers to these events "something like genocide" rather then "it was a genocide". Nor does it provide any form of information on how these events would conclude to meet such a criteria. I said previously these events were not notable, rather that to what the Isaaq faced in comparison to the other clans, In fact, I even stated that those events are already partly mentioned on the Somali Rebellion article along with those of other clans. totally unrelated as they don't mention a "genocide" but rather the events that occurred. Somajeeste (talk) 10:13, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Have you read the full Ingiriis article, Somajeeste? He states "The genocidal campaign in Northwest Somalia (present-day Somaliland), in the Isaaq-dominated territory of former British Somaliland, popularly known in public discourses as the 'Hargeisa Holocaust', matches what René Lemarchand calls a 'forgotten genocide'. The legacies of this genocidal campaign suggest distinctive horizontal and vertical consequences that led to a position of secession in Somaliland. Without the marginalization of the Isaaq clan and subjecting them to genocide, the Somaliland secession would not have received much support from the masses... In Somalia, the genocide perpetrated by the state resulted in clan conflicts...", etc. It is clear that he considers it a genocide. On the "these events completely fail to meet the criteria of a genocide" point, that's not for us to decide. We go with what the sources say. Please see Wikipedia:No original research. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:23, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

the subject is not of one mind. Using "Genocide" leans toward victims position,This does not mean that the other ones are invalid, and I think We should read about the subject before we make a decision. If we use the word and call it "Mass Murder" it would be better. Because we have two credible sources on this subject. (and others if not one of them are quote marking on "genocide") , also merging the article to Somali rebellion could work, using "genocide" narrative is one-sided . Allowing that the original article certainly needs a complete reworking, and without even approaching the fact that there are certainly distinctions between mass murder and genocicde than you are making it out.Somajeeste (talk) 11:53, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, just so you know, the entirety of the above post by Somajeeste is lifted, almost word for word, from posts by other editors, especially the nominator of the first AfD [39]. Try searching for:

For those that did use the term "genocide"

it wasn't their word choose

Not only is this a criteria of a genocide

the victims of the Barre government didn't hail from solely one clan but rather numerous other clans.

Nor does it provide any form of information on how these events would conclude to meet such a criteria.

I even stated that those events are already partly mentioned on the

they don't mention a "genocide" but rather the events that occurred

The same can be said about the current ongoing AfD, lifted from the previous discussion almost in its entirety. This is in addition of their history of disruptive editing and vandalism in Somaliland related pages as outlined in the comment [40]. Kzl55 (talk) 11:40, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll take a closer look into this. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:58, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Kzl55, that's not it since those spellings also have zero Google Ngrams [41]. Soupforone (talk) 05:29, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

That's not what? It's clear that quite a lot of sources do use the term genocide. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:31, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

I propose adding the following quote to the article, from the de Waal et al. source, which I think clarifies the relationship between actions agaist the SNM and the broader campaign quite effectively: What began as a counterinsurgency against the Somali National Movement rebels and their sympathizers, and escalated into genocidal onslaught against the Isaaq clan family, turned into the disintegration of both government and rebellion and the replacement of institutionalized armed forces with fragmented clan-based militia. The genocidal campaign ended in anarchy, and the state collapse that followed bred further genocidal campaigns by some of the militia groups that then seized power at a local level. Cordless Larry (talk) 11:40, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

That is almost satisfactory. However, it should be written in prose since it doesn't explain why the army began targeting the civilian areas. Two sentences from the other links I quoted above, amalgamated with that passage, is therefore workable-- "The government counterinsurgency against the Somali National Movement rebels and their sympathizers escalated as the army responded to successful SNM raids in Hargeysa and Bur'o with indiscriminate bombardment. Isaaq individuals in urban areas, including locales which the SNM did not attack, were targeted under the belief that they might abet the rebels; particularly soldiers, businessmen, civil servants and elders. Consequently, Mohamed Haji Ingiriis, Chris Mullin and Alex de Waal refer to this targeting of Isaaq clan members as a genocide." Soupforone (talk) 15:02, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

I suggest we include the quote unchanged as it makes the distinction between counterinsurgency against the SNM (as a group, including their sympathisers) and what later became a "genocidal onslaught against the Isaaq" as a "clan family" very clear.

The point raised by Cordless Larry still stands, there are many more reliable sources that refer to the Barre government actions as genocide than just Ingiriis, Mullin and de Waal. I suggest "the targeting of Isaaq as a clan by the Barre government would later be referred to as genocide by a United Nations report." which is less about opinion and more about a fact that a senior human rights advisor conducted an investigation, saw the mass graves, and came to this conclusion. And then perhaps mention the genocide as cited in scholarship. Kzl55 (talk) 15:21, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

De Waal indicates that the counterinsurgency escalated into a clan onslaught; he doesn't suggest that they are discrete, but rather the opposite. Anyway, please proffer the exact phrasing you think works. Soupforone (talk) 03:36, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

I think the Isaaq genocide should have its own section, where a link is provided to the main article as exampled by [42]. There is already an article on the subject so a summary section linked to the detailed Isaaq genocide article should be appropriate.

In the section I suggest starting with the de Waal quote, its very succinct and it makes a clear distinction between the government campaign against SNM as a group (this includes their sympathiser) and the genocidal campaign against the Isaaq. This would be followed by information from [43] on the scale of attacks, number of deaths, destruction of cities and perhaps end with "A United Nations investigation concluded that the Barre regime's killing of Isaaq civilians was a genocide, and that the crime of genocide was "conceived, planned and perpetrated by the Somali government against the Isaaq people". Many scholars including genocide scholars such as Israel Charny, Adam Jones and others have called the government attacks a genocide.

Also the description on the map needs changed to include Somaliland. The toponym on the Silk Road map is labelled Somalia, but this is an article on Somaliland and as such Somaliland should be included. Kzl55 (talk) 13:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Actually, De Waal does not imply that the government counterinsurgency against the SNM was unrelated to its clampdown in Isaaq areas, nor does the UN. He indicates elsewhere that "the SNM was overwhelmingly drawn from members of the Isaaq clan of north-western Somalia" [44]. The genocide claim must therefore be discussed in its proper context, within the Somali National Movement clampdown. Also, captions must accurately and neutrally represent file contents per WP:OI. Since the Silk Road map is labeled Somalia (a broad territory), that is what the caption should indicate per that policy. Soupforone (talk) 15:10, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

No one said the government attacks on the SNM were totally 'unrelated' to the wholesale killing of Isaaq people. The quote is clear in saying that "What began as a counterinsurgency against the Somali National Movement rebels and their sympathizers, and escalated into genocidal onslaught against the Isaaq clan family...", the distinction between the campaign against SNM and their sympathisers as a group and the genocidal killing of Isaaq civilians based on their Isaaq identity is clear. Some link the start of rebellion with other events, like the Somali defeat in the Ethio-Somali war, the subjects are still treated separately as per WP:GNG. There is also the fact that there is a detailed article discussing the Isaaq genocide so a separate section with a summary is appropriate.

As for the caption, as I have stated before, the article is on Somaliland, it is appropriate to have Somaliland in the description. Perhaps we need to create a new version of the Silk Road map for use in this article with a clear Somaliland label. Kzl55 (talk) 21:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

De Waal writes in his main work on the clampdown that-- "The SNM at the time comprised 3000 men, and they decided not to go quietly, but instead to storm their home towns. The fighting force was shattered in those battles - losing as much as 40 per cent of its men - and Siyad unleashed a reign of terror in the north-west, destroying the cities and forcing most of the population to flee" [45]. Ergo, per de Waal the government clampdown against the SNM and the destruction of civilian areas are inextricably tied since the SNM occupied those areas and the army pursued them there. As to the Silk Road map, it indicates Somalia because the Silk Road pertains to the territory as a whole, not just Somaliland. A neutral workaround this would be to caption the actual ancient city-states (Malao, Avalites...). Soupforone (talk) 04:19, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Again, no one is saying the government attack on the SNM is unrelated to the genocide. There was a progression from the government targeting SNM and their sympathisers to the government attacking any Isaaq based on their clan identity as Isaaq. This is a significant shift, and it is a significant event in the region's history. Isaaq genocide as a topic also has a detailed article so for the benefit of the reader, a summary section separate from the SNM is entirely appropriate. As for the Silk Road map, as I have stated above, the article is about Somaliland, an indication of Somaliland in the description is entirely appropriate, if it is not possible on the current map then there should be no issues with creating a new version to be used on this page with the Somaliland labelled, this has little to do with neutrality/bias and more with clarity. Kzl55 (talk) 12:36, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

De Waal indicates that the government escalated rather than shifted its existing SNM counterinsurgency. He explains this lucidly elsewhere [46]-- "The most serious rebellion was in the north, former British Somaliland, where the Somali National Movement (SNM) began guerrilla attacks in 1980 and briefly captured the two main towns in 1988. In a vicious scorched-earth counterattack, the government destroyed the cities and drove most of the population (principally Isaak) into exile in Ethiopia." Ergo, per de Waal, the government onslaught that he is alluding to was actually a scorched-earth counterattack of the SNM, with the dominant local clan in the leveled urban areas most affected by it. Somali National Movement is therefore a more contextually neutral header for the counterinsurgency, including the resulting civilian casualties. As to the map on the ancient Silk Road, the caption should be neutral and not insinuate anything on modern geopolitics. This other Silk Road map is a neutral compromise since it uses the ancient toponyms [47]. Soupforone (talk) 12:27, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

We are going in circles here. For the fourth time, no one here said the government attack on the SNM is unrelated to the genocide, but there was a significant shift from attacking SNM and its sympathisers only to attacking and killing Isaaqs based on their identity as Isaaq. The genocide is a significant event in the history of the country and seeing as it has its own article, it needs a summary section on the Somaliland page. Any thoughts on this @Cordless Larry:, @Ms Sarah Welch:?

As for the map it would work, but the one currently on the page is much clearer to read. Adding a Somaliland label to it would work fine for the purposes of this page. Kzl55 (talk) 13:08, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Somali National Movement would be a suitable heading for a section on the Somali National Movement as an organisation, but not for a section about actions against the Somali National Movement and the attempted genocide that those actions escalated into. Is there at least agreement to include the de Waal et al. quote? Cordless Larry (talk) 13:14, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

I believe so, the de Waal quote is very succinct, it would be a good addition to the section. There is also the removal of "Mohamed Haji Ingiriis and Chris Mullin suggest that..." which suggests only they label the events as genocide when many reliable sources did label it a genocide including genocide scholars. Kzl55 (talk) 13:25, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

As to the Silk Road map, its caption must be neutral and consistent with the indicated toponyms. If you disagree with these toponyms, then the other Silk Road map with the ancient toponyms is a neutral compromise. Soupforone (talk) 13:30, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

The map will only have one change, for the purpose of this page, and that is the addition of Somaliland for better clarity within this page. Then Somaliland could be added to the description. Kzl55 (talk) 13:35, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Which classical translation on the Silk Road indicates that it was coterminous with the contemporary Somaliland territory? If none, then that would be original research. The other map has the ancient toponyms. Soupforone (talk) 13:48, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

There was neither Somaliland nor Somalia during the time, seeing as the article is on Somaliland, having Somalia is on the map is not helpful to the reader. Also, Ms Sarah Welch raised a good point on WP:V and WP:RS aspects of the article which I had not considered before. If it is indeed someone's OR it should be removed. Kzl55 (talk) 14:08, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, no modern polity existed during that period, so a classically sourced map with the ancient toponyms should be used. Soupforone (talk) 14:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, how about the simpler heading Government clampdown then? The de Waal bit seems alright, but what he actually means by onslaught must be contextualized with his other scorched-earth explanation. Soupforone (talk) 13:27, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

per WP:ERA "Do not change the established era style in an article unless there are reasons specific to its content." to change the trade route to suit Somaliland is inappropriate.Somajeeste (talk) 13:57, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

1. (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
2. (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Kzl55: The above is WP:TLDR, and Soupforone's puzzling remarks about "Ngrams/ancient toponyms" etc are not helpful. I have read only parts of this discussion, and not cross checked the links. The article would be better if it includes a WP:SUMMARYSTYLE of Somali Rebellion article, with links to it and other main articles. Mention all sides, very close what the source(s) are stating (with attributions). This means, the side which calls it genocide of Isaaq people, the side that calls it "war against the SNM" (page 11), and the side which calls it a broader conflict that killed Isaaq, Hawiye, etc. For the first, you can find numerous sources by clicking books and scholar link in the above two Find sources. I like the heading-related and other suggestions of Cordless Larry. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:52, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

The Silk Road map is someone's OR, lacks external source, incorrect. Per WP:V and WP:RS, it does not belong in this article. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:55, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

To give you the TLDR version Soupforone opposes having a separate section for Isaaq genocide in the article. Seeing that it is a significant event in Somaliland's history, and already has an article discussing the subject in detail, would having a summary section with links to the main Isaaq genocide article not be appropriate? Also many thanks for the links! Kzl55 (talk) 14:08, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

You can certainly include something like {{main article | Somali Rebellion | Isaaq genocide}}; yet, remember this is the main Somaliland article. Perspective and relative balance is important, necessary per WP:NPOV. Neither suppress a tragedy, nor should one tragedy overwhelm the section. Of course, all this must rely and cite reliable sources. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:23, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Absolutely agree on a tragedy not overwhelming the section. I was thinking a summary section seeing as it is an significant event in the history of the country and that there is already a detailed article on it.Kzl55 (talk) 14:58, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Kzl55, what I actually oppose is presenting the various sides (including that of the genocide claimants) in Wikipedia's voice. Soupforone (talk) 14:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

A significant number of reliable sources call it a genocide and describe Barre's attempt to exterminate Isaaq as genocidal. You have included a very problematic edit when you added "Mohamed Haji Ingiriis and Chris Mullin suggest that..." which insinuates only they label the events as genocide when many reliable sources did label it a genocide including genocide scholars as well as an investigation by the United Nations. What more do you need? You've described the Isaaq genocide article as hyperbolic [48] in the past and voted for the article to be deleted twice, so your stance is clear. It is not exactly clear how having a separate section linking to a main article has anything to do with Wikipedia's voice. Kzl55 (talk) 14:58, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

The attribution is per the actual wikivoice policy. Per it, the genocide claim should not be presented in Wikipedia's voice since it is not uncontested. That is why I opted for delete or rename in the second nomination. Soupforone (talk) 15:18, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

You have described it as a hyperbole and voted for deletion twice when the article clearly meets WP:GNG. Also you are yet to explain or provide sources of who is it contested by. We have a United Nations report as well as a significant number of reliable sources describing it as genocide. Kzl55 (talk) 15:35, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Actually, I opted for deletion and then deletion or renaming. Anyway, the genocide claim is indeed not uncontested (ex. [49] [50]). The phrasing should therefore not be presented in Wikipedia's voice. Soupforone (talk) 05:52, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

So you actually meant that they were contested by the government that committed the genocide? And that is why you voted to delete it and now object to the use of genocide here? What else would they say? The vast majority of reliable sources agree it was genocide. The United Nations investigated the claim and concluded it was indeed a genocide, and here you are countering that Siad Barre and his government contested the claim. Somali army commanders are on tape plotting to kill civilians, for example here repeating the same points outlined in the report [51] (8 min mark): "kill even the wounded", "destroy water sources and reservoirs", "burn down villages, pillage and kill their residents", "Whoever submits, tell him his medicine is in the ground, and bury him there", "you must eliminate all", "allow no activity, no life" and the infamous line "kill all but the crows". RS include [52], [53], [54], [55], [56], [57], [58], [59], [60], [61] plus many more. @Cordless Larry:, @Ms Sarah Welch:, any opinion on this? Is Soupforone's use of citation in their reply above to force their personal pov appropriate given the many other RSs provided? Kzl55 (talk) 09:21, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Kzl55, it was explained to you above that there are at least three other sides to this (@13:52): the side which calls it genocide of Isaaq people, the side that calls it war against the SNM, and the side which calls it a broader conflict that killed Isaaq, Hawiye, etc. The Google links there indicate that there are between 5,400 and 6,160 total non-mirror results for the one-clan genocide claim. Put into perspective, that is around a third of the 19,300 total non-mirror results for SNM terrorism [62]. And just as some think tanks do categorize the conflict as a one-clan genocide, others like the Terrorism Research & Analysis Consortium classify the SNM as a terrorist organization [63]. Ergo, the phrasing should be neutral and not presented in Wikipedia's voice. Soupforone (talk) 13:13, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

These things are not mutually exclusive, though. Even if the SNM is widely considered a terrorist organisation, that doesn't mean that the same sources are denying that an attempted genocide against the Isaaq took place. Generally I agree with the attribution point though, so long as it's not suggested that only one or two authors support the genocide claim. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:51, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Soupforone please avoid using a strawman in this discussion, this is not helpful at all. No one on this page other than yourself is pushing the 'one-clan' narrative, even the article states that other groups were targeted, the same was repeated in both AfDs. A significant number of reliable sources call the event a genocide, as does the only United Nations investigation on the matter. You are clearly biased since you have voted for the deletion of the article twice despite it meeting all WP:GNG hence being deliberately difficult now that the vote did not go your way and the community decided to keep the article. Also stop using Google numbers in this discussion, WP is not a Google popularity contest. However if you insist, Google returns 38,200 results when you include other forms of writing Isaaq [64]. Your point about SNM and terrorism is off-topic and clearly not thoroughly thought out, one of the results from the first page of your search states: "This, together with a number of other factors resulted in the birth of the Somali National Movement (SNM) a political military liberation movement (April 1981)" [65]. Another (again from the first page) states: "Unlike other parts of Somalia, conflict in the region was averted when the Somali National Movement, the principal opposition group that had led the resistance against the Siyad Barre dictatorship in the region, and Isaq clan leaders purposely reached out to representatives of other clans in Somaliland" [66]. These were two quick finds from the first page of results, there are probably more. Any one of the actors involved in that part of Somali history will have their name appear in search results that may or may not actually involve them, this is why you should never use Google search results numbers as evidence again, it is not helpful at all. Also, even if the SNM was a terrorist organisation, unfounded claim but let us just run it, how does that take away or affect the genocide of Isaaq civilians?

Stop pushing your pov citing it is contested when we have the results of a United Nations investigation as well as genocide scholarship clearly describing the killing of Isaaq by the Somali government as genocide. Kzl55 (talk) 14:15, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Kzl55, what then in your opinion is the best way to actually quantify how common the one-clan genocide claim is over, say, the one-clan massacre claim? Because there are 799,000 non-mirror results for massacre plus those various spellings of Isaaq, which is exponentially more than there are for genocide plus those various spellings [67]. Is genocide therefore really the usual characterization of the one-clan civilian attacks if so few pages point to it compared to massacre? Anyway, can you please provide a link to this old UN report? You've alluded to it several times, but I can't seem to find the url. Soupforone (talk) 16:04, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

So far, you are the only one bringing Google search results, as explained to you above the number attached to these search results is not useful for this discussion, you can see the results from the very first page of searches above are in no way linking SNM to terror, contrary to your assertion. A similar thing is happening with the use of massacre and genocide, on the very first page of results you will see "The Ethiopian army wantonly massacred 51 civilians in Jama' Dubad village..." [68], has no relation to the subject of Isaaq genocide, I hope you can see the use of these numbers is very problematic.

There is no need to quantify anything, WP is built on reliable sources, plenty of reliable sources are provided. As for the UN investigation, it has been posted above; "Based on the totality of evidence collected in Somaliland and elsewhere both during and after his mission, the consultant firmly believes that the crime of genocide was conceived, planned and perpetrated by the Somali government against the Isaaq people of northern Somalia between 1987 and 1989" [69]

Also, it is your contention that there is no tie between the government counterinsurgency against the SNM and the clampdown in civilian areas, correct? How then would you explain the following-- "The SNM guerrillas relied heavily on Isaaq nomads for support, including food, water, transport and intelligence. In response, the government counter- insurgency strategy targeted the nomads, trying to restrict their movements and where possible drive them away from strategic areas of the territory. Large areas of dry season grazing land were mined. The government's counter-insurgency strategy was founded on attacking the civilian base of support for the SNM." [70] It's by Alex de Waal. Soupforone (talk) 16:04, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

No it is not as explained to you numerous times above "No one said the government attacks on the SNM were totally 'unrelated' to the wholesale killing of Isaaq people" and "Again, no one is saying the government attack on the SNM is unrelated to the genocide. There was a progression from the government targeting SNM and their sympathisers to the government attacking any Isaaq based on their clan identity as Isaaq." also "We are going in circles here. For the fourth time, no one here said the government attack on the SNM is unrelated to the genocide, but there was a significant shift from attacking SNM and its sympathisers only to attacking and killing Isaaqs based on their identity as Isaaq". Kzl55 (talk) 10:18, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Kzl55, when one indicates that x thing is more common than y thing, it is often good practice to try and objectively quantify that so as to demonstrate that it's not conjecture. Anyway, I think Mary's phrasing is a fair compromise, as it notes the government persecution in neutral language and is not in Wikipedia's voice. Soupforone (talk) 13:33, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Soupforone, the problem is not the attempt to quantify an issue, the problem is the lack of accuracy in the method as highlighted by the first page search results. I still think the genocide should have its own section, but happy to accept Ms Sarah Welch and Cordless Larry's solutions. Kzl55 (talk) 14:17, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, yes, it shouldn't be insinuated that the genocide claim only has two proponents. However, what those numbers do suggest is that the urban conflict is more frequently presented as a war against the SNM than as a one-clan genocide. Actually, if one plugs in one-clan massacre, that too has more non-mirror results than one-clan genocide - around twice as many (11,700 [71]). From this, it would appear that the more common appellation for the first side is actually one-clan massacre. Soupforone (talk) 14:23, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

The issue with these searches is that there are lots of potential variations in the precise language used by different authors, so I'm not sure how helpful the comparison is. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:29, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Yes, but these are finite spellings that can be taken into consideration in the actual search query. The logic behind these engines is that since they can be used to find material on a given topic, their search result numbers can also be used (albeit imperfectly) to estimate how common are search queries related to that topic. I believe the Google Keyword Tool is the most accurate tool available for keyword quantification, but unfortunately it is a paid service. This is what businesses actually use in their marketing. Soupforone (talk) 16:04, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't referring to different spellings, but to use of different wording (e.g. genocide, massacres, slaughter, etc.). Cordless Larry (talk) 09:29, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Ngrams are scholarly units in Google Ngram, but otherwise those seem to be a helpful suggestions. Soupforone (talk) 14:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Soupforone: You misunderstand Ngram. Kzl55: You can avoid confusion and dispute by attributing. For example, "According to scholars Donald Bloxham, Nicholas Robins and the United Nations (...). According to scholars Taisier Ali and Mohamed Ingiriis (....)". Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:59, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

I will most certainly keep that in mind going forward, many thanks. Kzl55 (talk) 15:36, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Kzl55: Avoid WP:FORUM-y debate with Soupforone or anyone else. Just ask them which sentence is in wikipedia voice. If they identify it, either attribute it as "Some scholars, such as ..., state...", or recompose that statement in another way. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:15, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Noted. This will be the last of these types of posts from me. Kzl55 (talk) 14:23, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

As per suggestion by Cordless Larry I think the de Waal quote would be a good addition to the section: What began as a counterinsurgency against the Somali National Movement rebels and their sympathizers, and escalated into genocidal onslaught against the Isaaq clan family, turned into the disintegration of both government and rebellion and the replacement of institutionalized armed forces with fragmented clan-based militia. The genocidal campaign ended in anarchy, and the state collapse that followed bred further genocidal campaigns by some of the militia groups that then seized power at a local level [72]. I would also suggest adding towards the end of of the section: "A United Nations investigation concluded that the Barre regime's killing of Isaaq civilians was a genocide, and that the crime of genocide was "conceived, planned and perpetrated by the Somali government against the Isaaq people"[73]. Many scholars including genocide scholars such as Israel Charny, Adam Jones and others have called the government attacks a genocide. And as suggested by Ms Sarah Welch, we should remove the OR Silk Road map. I would also suggest removal of the Google Ngram comment left in the section as it is neither helpful nor useful. @Cordless Larry:, @Ms Sarah Welch: anything else? Thoughts? Many thanks. Kzl55 (talk) 12:46, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Kzl55: The Ngram comment on this talk page is okay to leave in. Typically, only vandalism, gross personal attacks and such are removed from talk pages per WP:TALK. While Cordless Larry's quote is useful and relevant in the Isaaq genocide article, the entire quote may be a bit too much for this article. Summary style means just that. A short summary, with link(s) for the interest reader. If we decide to add de Wall, then consider "The counterinsurgency by the Barre regime against the SNM ended in anarchy and violent campaigns by fragmented militias.[73b]" In addition to this, please consider adding the sentence, "The Barre regime's onslaught was not limited to the Isaaq clan and it targeted other clans such as Hawiye.[73a] Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:02, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Ms Sarah Welch, I did not mean the Ngram comment on the talk page. I am not sure how to link to it, but on the actual Somaliland article, under the Somali National Movement section, there is a comment that says: -- per Google Ngrams, Isaaq genocide is a WP:NEOLOGISM: [74] --, I am not sure if this link would work, but you can see it here [75]. As for the quote, I think what makes it useful is that it makes a distinction between counterinsurgency against the SNM and the escalation into a genocidal onslaught against the Isaaq. If I may suggest: "The counterinsurgency by the Barre regime against the SNM escalated into a genocidal onslaught against the Isaaq and ended in anarchy and violent campaigns throughout the country, the situation bred further genocidal campaigns and violence by various militia groups.[73b]" What do you thnk? You point regarding addition of Hawiye is noted, I agree it should be added. Kzl55 (talk) 13:51, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Indeed, that embedded comment on Ngram is inappropriate OR and undue. Removed it. On rest, let us wait for comments from others. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:29, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Kzl55, that phrasing, along with de Waal's other phrase indicating that the counterinsurgency targeted the SNM's civilian base, could perhaps function-- The counterinsurgency by the Barre regime against the SNM escalated into a genocidal onslaught against the Isaaq clan,[73b] as the government targeted the rebel group's civilian base of support.[90] The clampdown ended in anarchy and violent campaigns by fragmented militias, which then wrested power at a local level.[73b] The Barre regime's persecution was not limited to the Isaaq, as it targeted other clans such as the Hawiye.[73a] Soupforone (talk) 03:35, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Bones of a man.jpg

This image, File:Bones of a man.jpg, was put into the article with the caption " Exhumed skeletal remains of victims of the Isaaq genocide found from a mass grave site located in Berbera, Somaliland." As far ass I can tell the caption violates Wikipedia:No original research. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 16:15, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

How so? The image is of exhumed skeletal remains of one of 17 people found in a mass-grave site in Berbera, Somaliland by a team of forensic investigators from the EPAF [76]. --Kzl55 (talk) 16:39, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

@CambridgeBayWeather: a quick update just in case you were not following the discussion, the caption issue has now been resolved, file name and categories removed by Soupforone have been restored and Soupforone acknowledged their mistake. A discussion on the matter ended with the understanding that Soupforone will behave reasonably, calmly, and courteously in their interactions with other editors in the future [77]. --Kzl55 (talk) 11:27, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Clan information

The information on the clans that inhabit Somaliland is incorrect. In the demographics section it says that the Gadabuursi are the second largest clan in the country which is wrong since the Harti clan is the second largest clan after the Isaaq. If anybody disputes my remarks please respond with reference to substantiate your stance. Thank you. Cagadhiig (talk) 21:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Most of the numbers are from previous and current voters registration numbers, so i guess since alot of harti didn't register to vote then i assume their numbers including population would be seen lower than gadabursi who came out in larger number than harti. Ciiseciise007 (talk) 04:29, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

So, who can you maintain that the Samaroon are larger when you actaully have no credible stastitcs to proof this point? don't you think it is wise to remove it because you don't know which clan is larger?Cagadhiig (talk) 18:21, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

In the clans section of demographics it states that the Isaaq execlusivly inhabit the regions of Togdheer and Waqooyi Galbeed, yet this not true because in the former, the Dhulbahante clans are the majority in the Buuhoodle district and in the latter the Gadabuuris clan settles in the Gabiley district. Additionally, there are about another 10 incorrect pieces of information in the last paragraph of that section please correct this or don't refer my edits. Cagadhiig (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Please cease the disruptive OR edits and be mindful of cited sources. As for the Samaron being the second largest, that particular statement is sourced, you can have a look at the citation for further details. --Kzl55 (talk) 19:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Somaliland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130627100400/http://www.mbali.info/doc494.htm to http://www.mbali.info/doc494.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928052641/http://wardheernews.com/Articles_09/June/Roobdoon_Forum/29_Independence_week_series.html to http://wardheernews.com/Articles_09/June/Roobdoon_Forum/29_Independence_week_series.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090116055005/http://www.buluugleey.com/warkiidanbe/Governance.htm to http://www.buluugleey.com/warkiidanbe/Governance.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120528122058/http://wardheernews.com/Articles_2010/June/Buh/29_Somaliland_recognition_%26_the_HBM-SSC_Factor.html to http://wardheernews.com/Articles_2010/June/Buh/29_Somaliland_recognition_%26_the_HBM-SSC_Factor.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140131003947/http://www.garoweonline.com/artman2/publish/Somalia_27/Somalia_Somaliland_appeals_for_cooperation_with_Puntland_a_second_time.shtml to http://www.garoweonline.com/artman2/publish/Somalia_27/Somalia_Somaliland_appeals_for_cooperation_with_Puntland_a_second_time.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110807153007/http://ukun.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=204732682 to http://ukun.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=204732682
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060615230152/http://somaliawatch.org/archivedec02/021207202.htm to http://www.somaliawatch.org/archivedec02/021207202.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140312061049/http://www.somaliareport.com/index.php/post/3271/What_is_Khatumo_State to http://www.somaliareport.com/index.php/post/3271/What_is_Khatumo_State
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110216012432/http://saylicipress.net/2009/09/08/the-declaration-of-adal-state/ to http://saylicipress.net/2009/09/08/the-declaration-of-adal-state/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.faoswalim.org/resources/site_files/W-01%20Climate%20of%20Somalia_0.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111001035012/http://www.adventistmission.org/article.php?id=1364 to http://www.adventistmission.org/article.php?id=1364

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:24, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Reverted edit July 2017

I have reverted the addition of some contentious material to the article regarding a report on SNM as the source in question contradicts other academic sources, for example in Building Peace and the State in Somaliland: The Factors of Success, Timothy A. Ridou states : "In January 1991, SNM forces were on the verge of capturing Borama, the most important Gadabuursi town. Instead of plundging into battle, they paused to negotiate a ceasefire which was mediated by SNM Colonel Abdirahman Aw Ali, a Gadabuursi. The Gadabuursi leaders were then persuaded to attend the Berbera conference", a different quote from the same text states: "By early 1990, Siad Barre had lost most of his control over northwest Somalia. With the situation in Somaliland clearly favoring the SNM, minority clans and clan-families living in the former British protectorate reached out to SNM leaders. The primary minority clans are the Gadabuursi and ‘Iise (Dir clan-family) in the west, and the Warsangeli and Dulbahante (Darood clan-family, Harti clan) in the east. Few members of these clans were affiliated with the SNM, and many sided with Siad Barre’s regime during the civil war. However, the Isaaq-dominated SNM adopted a policy of reconciliation with Somaliland’s minority clans instead of attempting to fight to the bitter end." source.--Kzl55 (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

You share a source I can't even access. They might've paused to negotiate a cease-fire in January, but the SNM continued with the assault in February 1991 as mentioned by the sources and I quote "In the northwest, the SNM assaulted and pillaged Borama, causing about 80,000 people to flee to Ethiopia. Additionally, the SNM attacked villages in Sanaag region and supposedly killed hundreds of non-combatant civilians"" [78]. “full-scale assault on Borama” on February 5[79]

Do you mind to share the PDF file? Google books mentioned a SNM attack on Borama, which you want to hide, but every Somali is aware of. Seeing you created the Isaaq genocide page it's only normal that you are biased and want to hide the massacres committed by the SNM against other clans. I would like to remind you Wikipedia is not a tool for Propaganda.Jamalwalal 15:01, 29 July

Please stop adding contentious material to the article. I have provided you with an example of one of many academic sources completely contradicting the content you are inserting into the article. Arguing you can not access the source is no reason to engage in an edit war, I have provided a verifiable link to a reliable source. Please resolve the issue in the talk page instead of edit warring. I would also avoid personal attacks, these dont go very far on Wikipedia.

Timothy A. Ridou states "In January 1991, SNM forces were on the verge of capturing Borama, the most important Gadabuursi town. Instead of plundging into battle, they paused to negotiate a ceasefire which was mediated by SNM Colonel Abdirahman Aw Ali, a Gadabuursi", he also clearly notes " However, the Isaaq-dominated SNM adopted a policy of reconciliation with Somaliland’s minority clans instead of attempting to fight to the bitter end." source. In State Recognition and Democratization in Sub-Saharan Africa, H. Kyed states: "When the SNM took over the northwest in early 1991, tensions between the Isaaq on the one hand and the Gadabuursi, Ciisa, Dhulbahante, and Warsangeeli on the other were high because the later clans had fought for Barre until his fall. In this situation, the SNM which after its victory over the Somali National Army became the superior military power in the region proposed peace negotiations." [80]. Anna Lindley states "the SNM reached hargeisa in February 1991. Some people of the non-Isaq groups (Gadabursi, Dhulbahante and Gaboye) fled to Ethiopia, fearing reprisals while other displaced people returned to a bombed-out and nearly deserted Hargeisa...." [81]. Again, I would continue the discussion on the talk page before adding or removing anything from the page. --Kzl55 (talk) 12:51, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

There is nothing contentious about the fact that the SNM invaded and pillaged Borama. Your sources don't prove that there was no attack carried out by the SNM on Borama in February, rather just mention their were negotiations in January, but the attack was subsequently continued in February as my source states [82]. “full-scale assault on Borama” on February 5[83]. 2 complete different months. There have been reconciliations but the SNM attack was still carried on Borama and the surrounding areas along with Ethiopian troops. Why would the people of Borama, the Gadabursi flee to Ethiopia fearing reprisal in February if there was no attack carried out? Thus you are contradicting yourself. There was also an attack on the town of Dilla at the end of January.[84]. Furthermore the SNM radio network also mentions a full scaled attack on Borama and I quote"On 5 February, according to the radio network of the SNM, the movement "launched a full-scale war on Boorama" against remnants of the Somali Armed Forces and followed up the next day with "mopping-up" operations throughout the region of Awdal. Boorama was "heavily shelled" in the attack and by the end of the month, 30,000 refugees, the majority of them Gadabursi, had fled to Ethiopia. The Gadabursi have been "traditionally at odds with the Isaak " clan"[85] ~~ JamalWalal, 20:48 , 29 July 2017 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, if someone adds contentious material, they can not edit war, they must use the talk page to further discuss and reach a consensus. You argue that Borama was attacked and pillaged by the SNM, but Kzl55 has brought sources that say otherwise. I suggest you stop adding contentious materials and wait for a consensus to be reached on the talk page before further editing. As for your discussion about why did the Gadabursi flee due to reprisal, that can be answered by the simple fact that they were one of the clans that were in collaboration, and were heavily armed by the Barre regime [86]. Another source indicates that the Gadabursi fled due to fear of reprisals, but that SNM decided against mass retaliation [87]. Your contention that Ethiopian troops collaborated with the SNM in 1991 is questionable, particularly when taking into consideration the fact that in 1988, Ethiopia and Somalia agreed to stop supporting each other's opposition movements, thus severing ties with the SNM [88]. With regards to your source about the SNM radio, it clearly states that the SNM was launching an offensive against remnants of the Somali Armed Forces and not the civilians. This also relates to your source about Dilla, where it states that the SNM came into clash with Gadabursi militia in the town.

As mentioned previously, the material you have added is highly contentious, and sources discussing this subject are conflicting. To prevent any edit warring from occurring, it would be best to continue discussing this topic on the talk page until a consensus has been reached. Koodbuur (talk) 18:12, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

The user Kzl55 didn't bring forth any sources that prove there was no attack on Borama or Dilla. Rather he proved that there were negotiations for a cease-fire in January. The Borama and Dilla attack subsequently happened at the end of January (Dilla) and the attack on Borama on the 5th of February. We can conclude that a cease-fire was not reached or short lived. Provided my information that is being removed is both relevant, and sourced to a reliable source, repeated removal is WP:Disruptive editing. Your source clearly contradicts your statement "Within two weeks after the overthrow Siyad Barre on 27 January 1991, the SNM had taken control of the major cities in North-West Somalia. Militias of the Gadabursi and Harti clans had fought the SNM, together with the government. Some 105,000 Gadabursi and 20,000 ‘Iisa fled to Ethiopia in fear of SNM reprisal. "[89]. How did the SNM take control of the major cities? Again proving me right that the SNM invaded and pillaged Dilla right after the overthrow of the government in Mogadishu and in February subsequently pillaged and raided Borama. [90],[91],[92], again even the SNM radio network mentions this: [93]. Somalia's Siad Barre regime and Ethiopia's Mengistu regime might've signed an agreement in 1988, but the attack happened after the fall of the regime of Siad Barre, which left no reason for Mengistu to adhere to the agreement, since Gadabursi miliatia were also fighting his regime inside the borders of Ethiopia[94].

I have completely proven that there was an attack on Borama and Dilla towns of the Awdal region and the only thing you concluded was that their were negotiations prior to the attack. The SNM perceived the people of Borama as remnants of the Somali Armed Forces, hence the pillaging and destruction caused to the town of Borama. The SNM radio network doesn't mention that civilians weren't killed.[95], which is highly unlikely seeing the damage caused to Borama and 105000 fleeing over the border into Ethiopia.

Even Somalilandpress, a reliable Somaliland news network mentions an attack on Borama which left 800 people dead.[96] ~~ JamalWalal, 23:36 , 29 July 2017 (UTC)

You first paragraph is full of inferences:

1. We can conclude that a cease-fire was not reached or short lived You cant conclude anything not explicitly said in the text.

2. How did the SNM take control of the major cities? Again proving me right that the SNM invaded and pillaged Dilla right after the overthrow of the government in Mogadishu and in February subsequently pillaged and raided Borama. Again, massive inference. SNM taking control does not equal pillaging and raiding of cities.

3. But the attack happened after the fall of the regime of Siad Barre, which left no reason for Mengistu to adhere to the agreement, since Gadabursi miliatia were also fighting his regime inside the borders of Ethiopia This is another inference, you are trying to string together Mengistu and Gadabursi fighting inside Ethiopia which is clearly unrelated.

As for your second paragraph, you cannot use a source and then disregard with it because you do not agree with it. As for your third paragraph, I do not believe Somalilandpress is a credible site to use as a source, particularly with respect to civilian casualties. Koodbuur (talk) 20:14, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

I have added a number of sources all clearly stating the SNM adopted a policy of reconciliation with groups that collaborated with the regime of dictator Siad Barre (like the Gadabursi) [97], [98]. The fleeing of Gadabursi does not necessarily mean the SNM carried out an attack, please do not makes such leaps, this could be due to their links to dictator Siad Barre as suggested "[these groups] fled to Ethiopia, fearing reprisals" [99]. Furthermore, as editor Koodbuur stated Ethiopia and Somalia have signed treaties and Ethiopia has already expelled the SNM and severed ties with them, which led to the SNM moving inside the borders of the Somali Republic in the first place. Ethiopia aiding SNM in an attack goes against all texts on that period. Additionally, your own source states that the SNM attacked remnants of the Somali Armed Forces in Borama, and not civilians [100].

It is clear that there was some tension between the SNM and Gadabursi militia armed and loyal to dictator Siad Barre, indeed Gadabursi identified with the government as noted by Michael Walls: Siyaad Barre also attempted to utilize clan affiliation in his favour by co-opting the support of the non-Isaaq clans in the north in his fight against the SNM. This worked to some degree, and many though not all of the Harti (in Somaliland, the Dhulbahante and Warsangeli) and Gadabuursi identified with the government. [101] (page 377).

As for the attack on Dilla, Michael Walls addresses this specifically and confirms the citation you’ve previously used stating that the SNM was indeed fighting in Dilla against government forces: In January 1991, in one of the final acts of the northern war, SNM militia had pursued retreating government forces to the town of Dilla, where they fought a ferocious battle. SNM militia had then continued into the main Gadabuursi town of Borama. However, because the SNM leadership believed that the Gadabuursi wished to seek peace, they withdrew their units within 24 hours to allow discussions to take place without the shadow of occupation. Their confidence was rewarded when a brief initial meeting in mid-February in Tulli, just outside Borama, agreed that Gadabuursi delegates would attend the Berbera conference and then resume bilateral talks once it had finished, this time in Borama itself.

From an SNM perspective, these meetings were an expression of the resistance movement's explicit policy that they were fighting the government of Siyaad Barre, rather than the other clans. [102] (page 378).

Two things are clear, 1) the SNM was fighting against government forces (in places like Dilla) and 2) the SNM, upon becoming the superior force in the north, adopted a policy of reconciliation with groups that formerly affiliated themselves with the government of Siad Barre. —Kzl55 (talk) 22:44, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Clans sub-section

The source provided in the sub-section states that the Sool region is almost exclusively occupied by the Dhulbahante clan, which you can find here , at Page 7.

Same source you used today [103] clearly states The Isaaq subclan Habar Yonis lives in the eastern part of the Xudun district and the very western part of the Laascaanood district, while the Isaaq subclan Habar Jeelo lives in the Caynabo district [104], as such the region is not exclusive any more than Togdheer is not exclusive. --Kzl55 (talk) 10:57, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

The source that states Sool is "Almost exclusively" occupied by Dhulbahante is the report on the fact finding mission on Somalia and Kneya.A source you have yourself used before to support that Erigavo is dominated by Isaaq clans.Xargaga (talk) 11:09, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

The source you have used yourself previously states Isaaq living in three (out of four) districts in Sool, that clearly means the region is not exclusive, especially with one district (Aynabo) being exclusively Isaaq. Togdheer on the other hand has Isaaq exclusively living in three districts, and sharing Buhodle with Harti, yet it can not be described as exclusive. If you read your source (p.7) you would see the use of the word "exclusively" is the opinion of one person, Fatima Jibrell, who also claims the population of Sool region is 99,9% Dulbahante, clearly not true. You are being disruptive, I suggest you stop. --Kzl55 (talk) 11:29, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Again the source says " almost exclusively", not exclusively, there is a difference. You yourself have supported information contained in the same source on page 6 on the Erigavo article which was the opinion of one person, Matt Bryden, who stated "Erigavo was wholly dominated by the Habr Jallo and Habr Yonis". Although, other users have provided plenty of source which say otherwise you were adamant that sourced information should not be removed. The Dhulbahante also settle in Burao district at Xadhadhan yet that wasn't mentioned, so the Isaaq clans in Qorilugud should not be mentioned either as they are negligible. I have sourced my contribution, using a source which you support and used before, so how am i being disruptive? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xargaga (talk • contribs) 12:33, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

You are being disruptive through tendentious editing. It is clear that neither "exclusively" nor "almost exclusively" are appropriate when other groups live in three out of four districts of the region, one of which they inhabit exclusively (Aynabo). Matt Bryden is a researcher with expertise in the region, Fatima Jibrell is an informant, clearly not a reliable one at that with claims of 99,9% exclusivity that no one accepts to be true. The "other users" on the Erigavo article you mention were none other than you under a different account. You have been blocked before for the same behaviour. For the last time, I suggest you perform a self-revert. --Kzl55 (talk) 12:56, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Fatima Jibrell is the Executive Director and founder of Adeso a non-governmental organisation which specifically operates in northern Somalia. She is considered an expert in the political and economic affairs of the northern region of Somalia. she has contributed on dozens of research studies on this subject. Can you explain why Matt Bryden would be more credible an expert than her? She is afforded the same presence in the source, so why is she an informant in this specific study, yet Bryden is not?Xargaga (talk) 13:59, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

I have followed the guidelines set in WP:REF, yet you accuse me of tendentious editing and per the guidelines set in WP:TEND accusations of tendentious editing can be inflammatory and can be seen as a personal attack. You should provide evidence of the tendentious editing you witnessed. If my editing of this article qualifies for tendentious editing why would your editing of the Erigavo not equally qualify?Xargaga (talk) 14:17, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

You are attempting to use the word of an informant claiming Sool to be 99,9% inhabited by Dhulbahante, a claim you can not justify and (I hope) accept to be erroneous, yet you cling on to the usage of the word exclusive. The same paragraph (quoted from the very source you've used) clearly states three out of four districts within Sool are also inhabited by Isaaq, with one district being exclusively inhabited by Isaaq. Going by this skewed usage of the word 'exclusive', the region of Togdheer would then be exclusively inhabited by Isaaq, seeing that they reside in all four of its districts. You were previously blocked (on multiple accounts) for the exact same behaviour. I suggest you perform a self-revert or risk getting another block.

As for your query regarding Bryden vis-à-vis Jibrell, well Jibrell is an environmental activist, Bryden is a researcher with expertise in the Horn of Africa region, a former Special Advisor to the Canadian Ambassador on Somali Affairs, former staff at UNDP, former Horn of Africa Director for the International Crisis Group, former adviser on Somali affairs for the United States Agency for International Development USAID and the US embassy, you get the idea. --Kzl55 (talk) 14:36, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

You say that it is not appropriate to use the word "exclusively" yet its ok to use the word "dominate" in the context of Erigavo?! maybe your tendentious editing. And as you have explained before..introducing your own analysis or conclusion to cited text is considered original research and is not allowed on Wikipedia. For the purposes of this article the source clearly states that Sool is almost exclusively inhabited by Dhulbahante. Anyhow, if your not happy with that particular source, i have included another source which confirms that Sool is almost exclusively inhabited by Dhulbahante, , at p.10. Please do not remove this, to do so would be disruptive editing.Xargaga (talk) 15:33, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

• @Xargaga and Kzl55: First, immediately cease the personal attacks, both of you. This is specifically a dispute on what wording is supported by the sources, so you should specifically be discussing what wording is supported by the sources. Provide the sources, and provide specific quotes from the sources, and directly base the wording off of that. If you can't agree, quote the sources directly and attribute any quotes to their sources. Quit commenting on each other, and focus on the content. Because neither of you could behave or act civilly, the page is fully protected for two days, which should give you plenty of time to hammer out what the sources say, or start dispute resolution proceedings, if necessary, but I will gladly lift the page protection in favor of blocks if you keep attacking each other personally in any way. Swarm ♠ 19:31, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

On page 7 of the source the source that is at dispute states, "Regarding the Sool region in eastern North-West Somalia, which was almost exclusively occupied by Dhulbahante members (Fatima Jibrell said that the population of the Sool region was 99,9% Dulbahante), Matt Bryden said that Dhulbahante was not in armed conflict with any of the Isaq clans in the area". Another quote from another source states at p.10, "the Dhulbahante almost exclusively inhabit Sool region". Yet another source states at p.405 "Dhulbahante, a branch of the Harti clan, almost exclusively inhabits sool".There is no ambiguity in all 3 quotes from the cited sources. For this reason the wording "almost exclusively" should be included in the article. If this could not be agreed upon alternatively the word "exclusively" should be exchanged for "predominantly". However, the original source should be drop from all wikipedia articles such as the Erigavo article.

@Swarm: apologies, I only mentioned editor's history of edits and previous perma-blocks for context.

The use of "almost exclusive" in the source above was by a none-expert informant, Fatima Jibrell, who is an environmental activist, this is highlighted by her claim that 99,9% of the region being inhabited by Dhulbahante, a claim that is demonstrably inaccurate (most recently by voter registration numbers which attributed only half of voters in the Somaliland presidential election of that region to the Dhulbahante, no where close to the 99,9% figure [105]), and one that I believe editor Xargaga is not supporting. As for the other source editor Xargaga cited, it is specifically claiming that Dhulbahante reside in Sool exclusively (and not in other regions), it is not claiming that Dhulbahante exclusively make up the region's residents, please note the context, specifically that the previous sentence states where the Warsangali clan resides, the quote in full: Two other, smaller Harti subsets, the Warsangeli and Dhulbahante, live mainly within the colonial borders of Somaliland and the areas claimed by Puntland. The Warsangeli mainly reside in eastern Sanaag, whereas the Dhulbahante almost exclusively inhabit Sool region [106].

As outlined in previous comments above, the use of "exclusive" or "almost exclusive" in describing Dhulbahante as inhabitants of Sool is not appropriate because the region is inhabited by other clans as well. This is something editor Xargaga is not disputing. The same paragraph in the Wikipedia article lists other clans (Habar Jeclo and Habar Yonis, both Isaaq subclans) inhabiting 3 out of the four districts of Sool, with one district of that region being exclusively inhabited by them, to quote from EASO report: with Habar Jeclo subclan of Isaaq living in the Aynabo district whilst the Habar Yoonis subclan lives in the eastern part of Xudun district and the very western part of Las Anod district [107]. As such the use of the word "exclusive" or "almost exclusive" is problematic. The current wording used in the article (which appears to have been stable for quite some time before the recent edits) included the specification of of 'west Sool' (for Isaaq), and 'east Sool' (for Dhulbahante), this is more appropriate and illustrative of the geographic divide, as used in multiple sources e.g University of York/UNICEF: "[The Isaaq clan] situated in the central Somaliland districts, especially Maroodijeex, Sahil and Togdheer, but also in Eastern Awdal and Western Sool and Sanaag" [108], as well as academically e.g: "... claimed political and administrative jurisdiction over territory inhabited by Harti clans (Warsangeli and Dhulbahante). This was mainly the eastern Sool and Sanaag regions of Somaliland" [109]. This east/west description is much clearer and makes the distinction between different groups living within the region. I propose keeping the current wording: Eastern Sool's residents mainly hail from the Dhulbahante, a subdivision of the Harti confederation of Darod sub-clans, and are concentrated at Las Anod and perhaps add "predominantly" as suggested by Xargaga to become Eastern Sool is predominantly inhabited by members of the Dhulbahante subclan, a subdivision of the Harti confederation of Darod sub-clans, and are concentrated at Las Anod.--Kzl55 (talk) 00:05, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

The primary concern of this discussion is should the term "almost exclusively" be included into the article as it was stated in the source.However, it is not concerned with the experts who were consulted with when the report was being compiled. I believe that since this source is considered a reliable source by editor User:Kzl55 (as they have used it on numerous occasions), there is no reason why they should not accept it in its entirety and accept the term "almost exclusively" to be included. You can not simply pick and choose the parts of a source you agree with, wikipedia is about taking a neutral point of view Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. As for the other source that was cited which also used the term "almost exclusively", User:Kzl55 believes that the term was used in the context of Sool, Somalia being the only region inhabited by Dhulbahante. This, however, is not correct because on the same page of the document it is stated that "within the Dhulbahante clan, which inhabits most parts of Sool region as well as parts of eastern Sanaag and Togdheer regions in Somaliland".The very same term is also used a third time a by the academic Markus V. Hoehne in his research paper (cited), stating that the sool region is almost exclusively inhabited by the Dhulbahante clan.It is clear from source cited that indeed Sool is inhabited "almost exclusively" by Dhulbahante. Therefore, it should be included into the article, if User:Kzl55 does not agree they can apply for dispute resolution. Alternatively, they can agree to remove reference to the source from all wikipedia articles and the term predominantly will be used instead of "almost exclusively", like it is being for the Togdheer region.

We are going in circles. This whole discussion is pointless. Do you dispute that other clans (Isaaq) live in three (out of four) districts of this region, with one of these districts inhabited exclusively by them? If not then the wording "exclusive" or "almost exclusive" is not appropriate nor helpful for WP readers. As presented above plenty of reliable sources make the distinction east/west Sool in describing the region, particularly due to the political meaning of this divide with relation to Somaliland (the subject of the article!). As such the current wording is appropriate. Addition of "predominantly" is applicable in the context of east Sool, if any. --Kzl55 (talk) 13:45, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

I agree with User:Kzl55 in that it is more suitable to use the wording of East and West Sool, rather than exclusive or almost exclusive. There are many sources that indicate that Sool province is inhabited by more than one clan; and as well the use of east and west to describe Sool province has been seen in reputable media such as BBC as shown here and scholarly research as shown here. Koodbuur (talk) 14:47, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@ User:Kzl55, I agree we are going around in circles, that why I would recommend apply for dispute resolution. Whether I dispute other clans living in Sool is not the point of discussion here. The use of the term is appropriate because three different reliable sources have been provided which all use it and you do not dispute their reliability. Additionally, you have not produced reliable, published sources which clarify why the term "almost exclusively" cannot be adopted. The only source you brought gives a description of the clans that settle in the region and it does not address the point of discussion here. "Almost exclusively" does not mean the entire region is inhabited by Dhulbahante but it explains that the vast majority of it is inhabited by them. If there are any other clans they significances is minimal.

@ User:Koodbuur The first source you cited, is not concerned the point of discussion here. The second source is a broken link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xargaga (talk • contribs) 16:06, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

My apologies, here is the second link [110]. In this source, Markus Höhne uses East and West Sool to distinguish the diversity of the province "The president left Laascaanood hastily and retreated to Caynabo, a district town in western Sool where Isaaq are predominant." The first source is in fact relevant to the discussion because it is a reputable media outlet (BBC) that too distinguishes Eastern Sool from the rest of the province. Sool is not a homogeneous province, and it is not neutral to argue that the entire province is Dhulbahante, when there are other communities residing there. Hence the importance of using East and West Sool in the demographics. Koodbuur (talk) 16:33, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@ User:Koodbuur, the second source you provided has already been discussed here. On P.405 of the document it states that "Dhulbahante, a branch of the Harti clan, almost exclusively inhabits sool".And the fact that the other clans such as Fiqishini, Isaaq, Kaskiiqabe and Gabooye also inhabit the region is not at dispute. However, what is confirmed that "Almost exclusively" Sool is inhabited by Dhulbahante. On the first link you provided does not lead to the information you suggest here, it just states that "A pressing concern will be the troubled eastern Sool and Sanaag regions, where there are mixed views about joining a breakaway republic", which is totally a different matter.Xargaga (talk) 17:13, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@Xargaga, so you accept other clans live in the region, in three out of four districts, yet you still want to use the label "almost exclusive"? This is neither reasonable nor helpful to WP readers. The use of "almost exclusive" in your first source is based on one informant (not an expert but an environmental activist) you are quoting stating the region is 99,9% inhabited by Dhulbahante, a claim that is decidedly inaccurate (I have raised this point numerous times above and attached the most recent voter registration numbers, closest thing we have to a census, showing even distribution of demographics). Your second source is discussing the fact that Dhulbahante reside in Sool 'almost exclusively' (i.e. mostly reside in that region and not other regions), the context is clear when you read the paragraph: Two other, smaller Harti subsets, the Warsangeli and Dhulbahante, live mainly within the colonial borders of Somaliland and the areas claimed by Puntland. The Warsangeli mainly reside in eastern Sanaag, whereas the Dhulbahante almost exclusively inhabit Sool region. A more neutral and precise east/west Sool description, as currently used in the article (which has been stable, at least in this section) is more appropriate. I have listed many reputable sources using this description (e.g. [111], [112] and [113]) and I see editor Kodbor also cited reputable international media (BBC) and other academic scholarship. Furthermore, it is important to make such distinction due to the political divide resultant from this demographic divide (see Khatumo, Somaliland/Somalia dispute..etc), and how it manifests itself in Somaliland, the subject of this article.--Kzl55 (talk) 17:48, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@ Kzl55, Again whether I accept other clan residing in the Sool region is not of concern here, thats is a point for another discussion. What is being debated here is the term "almost exclusively". However, needs to clarified is do agree that the term is from a reliable source? If you agree that it is a reasonable and reliable source, then there is nothing to dispute about, the term should say in the article. Regarding the second source, i have already explained that...on the same page of the document it says that "within the Dhulbahante clan, which inhabits most parts of Sool region as well as parts of eastern Sanaag and Togdheer regions in Somaliland". So, clearly your understanding of the quote is not correct. User:Koodbuur raised only on source which has relevance to this discussion which has all ready been cited. And it concurs with my argument that sool is almost exclusively inhabited by Dhulbahnte. Your proposal of explaining that there is an east/west divided would not be appropriate or correct because Dhulbahante clans reside in all parts of the region. For the sake of compromising I would suggest adapting a neutral and accurate explanation, for example, Isaaq clans reside in parts of Caynabo and Hudun districts. However, the Sool region is predominantly inhabited by Dhulbahante clans. Additionally, this source (if you believe is not reliable) will be deleted from all Wikipedia articles including the Erigavo article. If can not agree to this, I think we might have reached an impasse and therefore request dispute resolution. Xargaga (talk) 19:18, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@User:Xargaga if you acknowledge the presence of other clans in Sool province, then why do you insist on arguing that the region is exclusively Dhulbahante? I brought up the first source to show the widespread use of the terms East and West Sool in reputable media and scholarly work to distinguish between the various communities living in the province. As Kzl55 and myself have mentioned, it is not neutral to misconstrue a single source that could be interpreted that Dhulbahante almost entirely live in Sool province, when other sources have been brought that show the diverse nature of the region. Koodbuur (talk) 19:22, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@ User:Koodbuur, I don't know if you have read my responses to Kzl55, but am not disputing that other clans settle in the region, however, I am arguing that the overwhelming majority of the inhabitants hail from the Dhulbahante clan, hence, why I believe the term "almost exclusively" should is appropriate. And to correct you have only produced one source of relevance here, which was already cited. The other link you mention does not work, check it again. I don't know if you have read my previous response but i produced three source which all state that almost exclusively Dhulbahante inhabit sool. So, its not just one source but three. All reputable and reliable as both you and Kzl55 agree.

Again whether I accept other clan residing in the Sool region is not of concern here

It is of concern, simply because if you accept that other clans live in the region (and you have not disputed it in this discussion) then the verbiage "almost exclusively" should not be used. That is common sense. Couple that with the usage of east/west Sool in scholarship and international media outlets as cited above, as well as the pertinence of this divide with relations to Somaliland's internal politics and disputes with Somalia, this is the most helpful for readers, accurate and neutral description we can use. I have proposed a compromise earlier adding your suggestion of "predominantly" within the context of east Sool, I think it should satisfy your concerns, that or the current wording is the way to go. Based on their comment above, I see that editor Kodboor is also happy with the current wording. I suggest we move on and not continue wasting time arguing over this.--Kzl55 (talk) 20:13, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Firstly, do you accept that the source is reliable? If you do then it is settled, the term shall be used. The term has also been stated in two further reasonable and reliable source which have been both cited and you have not disputed their credibility. Additionally, you claim to have cited scholarship and international media outlets, however, this is not correct, if you see my response to User:Koodbuur both cited source a redundant for your argument - one is a broken link, the other I have all ready cited. The most accurate and neutral point of view that can be offered to readers is that which the reliable sources cited agree upon, since you have not brought forward any source at all which makes the term "almost exclusively" excessive. You have not proposed any compromise at all. Including that east Sool is predominantly Dhulbahante is a step back and no progress. And you have not accepted any of the compromise i have put forward, therefore, since we are at impasse I will proceed to request dispute resolution. Xargaga (talk) 20:42, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

I have requested dispute resolution - (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Talk:Somaliland#Clans_sub-section). Xargaga (talk) 21:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

"if you see my response to User:Koodbuur both cited source a redundant for your argument - one is a broken link, the other I have all ready cited."

This is inaccurate. I provided a correction for the broken link [114] which you then stated was something you had already cited. You are clinging to a specific usage of the word that may give the reader of the article the wrong impression that Dhulbahante are the exclusive, or near exclusive inhabitants of the region, despite acknowledging that there are other communities in the area, and that reputable media and scholarly work divide the province into East and West Sool to represent the divide in political views that is based on demographics. This is unreasonable. I am in agreement with User:Kzl55 that it is more neutral to keep the current wording. I am also happy to accept their compromise in adding East Sool is predominately Dhulbahante, if that will end the matter. Koodbuur (talk) 21:27, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@Xargaga, you have already accepted other groups do inhabit three (out of four) districts of the region, as such your suggestion of usage of "exclusively" or "almost exclusively" in this article is neither neutral, nor fair nor helpful to Wikipedia readership. Furthermore I have already highlighted your first source's inaccurate usage of "almost exclusively" based on an erroneous 99,9% figure (that you have not disputed its inaccuracy) that came from a none expert informant (Fatima Jibrell who is an environmental activist). What's more, multiple reliable sources were cited all using the same east/west Sool divide, ranging from reputable international media (BBC) to academic scholarship, as explained above this specific use is important due to the diversity of the region, and also because of the geopolitical manifestations of this divide (Khatumo group and disputes between Somaliland and Puntland/Somalia come to mind). This is why current wording, or a compromise by adding "predominantly" (as you have suggested) but in the context of east Sool is the best and most neutral outcome. --Kzl55 (talk) 21:46, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@ Koodbuur, The link is still inaccessible, I only viewed the paper because i accessed it through a different link, which is cited above. However, it does not support your assertion because it does categorically state that the Dhulbahante almost exclusively inhabit sool. Nobody is disputing that other clans settle in the region however minimal their presence is. The other link can not be accessed, you can only read a passage which states, "A pressing concern will be the troubled eastern Sool and Sanaag regions, where there are mixed views about joining a breakaway republic". If this is the information your referring to it does not concern this discussion in any form. It would be better if you could provide another link and a direct quote supporting your argument. The term is reasonable and appropriate because (as has been mentioned plenty of times above) evidently most academics and researchers concur that it is overwhelmingly, predominantly,and almost exclusively P.7, P.10, P.405 inhabited by Dhulbahante clans. The "compromise" you and User:Kzl55 suggest cannot progress the discussion because it is no progress at all. I have suggested using the term predominantly in exchange but that does not satisfy you requirements. Your suggests all also are not sufficient because it would be incorrect and wrong to state that east sool is inhabited by Dhulbahante since this clan settles in all parts of the region - east, south, north and west. Xargaga (talk) 22:02, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

That is inaccurate. In that paper, Markus Höhne states: ""The president left Laascaanood hastily and retreated to Caynabo, a district town in western Sool where Isaaq are predominant.". Here the author uses Western Sool to distinguish Isaaq as the predominant majority. The BBC citation indicates that Eastern Sool, along with Eastern Sanaag are where there were political differences in forming a breakaway republic; a difference that is rooted along clan lines. Your suggestion of having the entire Sool province described as predominately Dhulbahante, while a significant section of the region is predominately Isaaq is not neutral and is misleading to readers. Koodbuur (talk) 22:36, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@ Kzl55, Once again I am NOT disputing that other clans settle in the region, I have already mentioned that clans such as Fiqishini, Kaskiqabe, Isaaq and Gabooye do settle in the region along with the Dhulbahante who make up the vast majority of the population, as the sources cited clarify. To correct you Fatima Jibrell is not just an informant (as you put it) but a distinguished expert on equal par with Matt Bryden. She has given her specialist opinion regarding the northern regions of Somalia in countless research studies. I doubt that the Danish Immigration service would have requested her input on the report if she was considered to be biased. The 99.9% might be a bit excessive, but, since no census was ever conducted in Somalia, one would only guess the a percentage. I believe she was emphasising the fact the almost exclusively the region is inhabited the aforementioned clan. In addition, Matt Byrden who is also interviewed for the report (and you consider to be more of an expert) does not disagree with her guess. You are wrong to say that multiple source have been cited, because so far NONE have been provided by both you or User:Koodbuur. Both links koodbuur provided are redundant to your argument as I have explained above numerous times. And again adding 'predominantly east sool is inhabited by Dhulbahante' is no progress at all. If you read the section of the article that is at dispute it is already mentioned that east sool's residents 'mainly' hail from Dhulbahante. So, you have not made any effort to compromise. Additionally, stating that the Dhulbahante settle in east sool would be simply wrong because the settles in all corners of the region. Xargaga (talk) 22:33, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@ User:Koodbuur, On the first quote the author is simply referring to the town of Caynabo being predominantly Isaaq. However, he is not reffering to the entire western part of the Sool region being inhabited by the Isaaq clan, as you suggest. The context is not ambiguous, it is very clear. All the while he categorically states in p.405 that the region is 'almost exclusively' inhabited by Dhulbahante. The "BBC citation" states that "A pressing concern will be the troubled eastern Sool and Sanaag regions, where there are mixed views about joining a breakaway republic". In which form does this state that the west of Sool is inhabited by Isaaq?. It is very clear from the quote, that concerning events have occurred in the two eastern regions of Sool and Sanaag, where there is mixed views on the independence of Somaliland. Which is totally not thing to do to what is being discussed. Additionlly, drawing your own conclusions from sources is called original research and it is not allowed on wikipedia. Xargaga (talk) 22:50, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Do you agree that the town of Caynabo, the urban centre of Caynabo district, is predominately Isaaq? If so then you cannot describe the entire Sool province as exclusively Dhulbahante, seeing as though Caynabo district is predominately Isaaq as stated by Markus Höhne, and also by this source [115] that states "with Habar Jeclo subclan of Isaaq living in the Aynabo district whilst the Habar Yoonis subclan lives in the eastern part of Xudun district and the very western part of Las Anod district". The second of that statement also dismisses the claim that Sool province is exclusively Dhulbahante as there are Isaaq clans living in parts of Xudun and Las Anod district. Going back to Caynabo, it is important to note that this district actually had more voters registered than the capital Las Anod district [116]. This is more than enough support to counter the claim that Sool is exclusively, or almost exclusively, Dhulbahante.

With regards to the BBC link, it indicated that eastern Sool and Sanaag had mixed views about joining the Republic of Somaliland. This is precisely why east and west Sool indication is important because of the political manifestations of the demographic divide. This is not a conclusion drawn from inference, but rather an important support to the notion that Sool is divided into East and West. This is why the current wording that describes Sool is neutral, because it used in both reputable media and scholarly work. Koodbuur (talk) 23:15, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

@Xargaga, the fact that you have accepted that other groups inhabit three out of the four districts within the region of Sool renders this whole discussion about "exclusive" and "almost exclusive" moot, as it misleads the readers into thinking no other significant groups live in the region. As well as removing nuance from the description of the region as an area with diverse groups having different (or similar) political outlooks and conditions. Fatima Jibrell, is an expert but perhaps not at the subject at hand as she is an environmental activist, she also bases her statement on an erroneous (even by your admission) figure of 99,9% of the region being inhabited by Dhulbahante. This is inaccurate, and as stated above by editor Koodbuur, the closest thing we have to a census which is the recent voter registration figures paints an entirely different image with an even distribution of population across east/west divide of the region.--Kzl55 (talk) 00:00, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

@ Koodbuur, again - 'almost exclusively' not 'exclusively', meaning there are other clans are present in the region but they are a small minority. The fact the author mentions one town being predominantly Isaaq, does not negate his other statement of the Sool region being almost exclusively inhabited by Dhulbahante. The other source provides a brief description of were respective clans settle and again it does not nullify that the vast majority of the population hail from the Dhulbahante clan. The Somaliland voter registration figures do not support any argument here. And if your seeking to suggest that the fact the figures somehow proof a presence of Isaaq clans in the region, that is not allowed because it would be original research.

You can not reach your own conclusion from a source and present it as a fact, it is called original research and it is not allowed on Wikipeida. Xargaga (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

@Kzl55, it has been my entire argument that there are no other significant groups in the region. As you can see from this other source (p.130), only the Dhulbahante is significant enough to mention of the clans settling in the region. Readers will receive a well informed description of the region, backed by the credible and reliable sources already discussed above. Fatima Jibrell's guessed figure is just an emphasise of how almost exclusively this clan settles in the region. The voter registration does not support your argument in any way, unless you are trying to infer a conclusion from it and as i already reminded User:Koodbuur that is not allowed in Wikipedia - it's called original research. Xargaga (talk) 00:18, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

The phrase "almost exclusively" suggests to readers that other communities are insignificant in number. That is inaccurate and misleading. That one town the author mentioned is the capital of Caynabo district. The fact that one of the four district capitals is predominately Isaaq dismisses the argument that non-Dhulbahante clans are insignificant in number, thus the use of "almost exclusively" is inappropriate. The second source mentions the presence of Isaaq in all of Caynabo district, and as well as Xudun and Las Anod districts. That is three of the four districts where other clans are settled. With regards to the voter registration, the number of registered voters in Caynabo indicates that there is a sizeable Isaaq community living in Sool province. While voter registration does not equal population, the fact that 31,000 out of the 80,000 people registered in Caynabo (which has been agreed to be predominately Isaaq), this shows that Isaaq are a significant population in Sool, and therefore the use of "almost exclusively" to describe Dhulbahante in Sool is misleading and not neutral. With regards to original research, you have concluded that Dhulbahante are the almost exclusive inhabitants of the entire province of Sool based on a single quote Fatima Jibrell, and have not taken into consideration other interpretations of that phrase. It is also important to note that you have dismissed her 99.9% figure, but accepted the "almost exclusive" phrase as proof that Dhulbahante are the overwhelming majority inhabitants of the entire province Koodbuur (talk) 00:40, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

@ Koodbuur, Must i remind you again you cannot deduce information from sources and reach a conclusion - it is OR. The author mentions the town of Aynaba being predominantly Isaaq and not the entire district. Regarding the second source, we are not disputing what respective clans settle within the region, but, rather does the Dhulbahante clan 'almost exclusively' settle in the region - in other words are they the overwhelming majority?. The answer would be yes as the sources cited have indicated. The reader would not be ill-informed because (as its been explained above) the only group significant enough to mention are the Dhulbahante who according to numerous scholars are almost exclusively inhabiting the region - Fatima Jibrell, Matt Bryden, Belachew Gebrewold and Markus Höhne all concur that the region is indeed 'almost exclusively' inhabited by this clan. You and User:Kzl55 are yet to provide a source which categorically, state otherwise. And to settle the dispute you dont wish concede or compromise. Xargaga (talk) 00:57, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

It is not original research to state that the wider Caynabo district is inhabited by Isaaq as it is mentioned by this source [117]. I have shown you through various sources that Isaaq settle in 3 of the 4 districts of Sool province, while being the predominant majority in 1 of the 4 district capitals. That is more than enough to dismiss the claims that Dhulbahante almost exclusively make up the entirety of Sool province. You have yourself agreed that Sool province is inhabited by other clans, and you have yet to provide a source that indicates that Dhulbahante are the overwhelming majority of region to the extent that the presence of other clans can be omitted. This use of "almost exclusively" is misleading, and was inferred from a statement made by Fatima Jibrell; an individual whose 99.9% claim you have dismissed. This is clearly a case of original research, where you have concluded that "Dhulbahante almost exclusively inhabit Sool" means that Dhulbahante are the overwhelming majority of the province, and not have considered the possible interpretation that the author was stating that Dhulbahante primarily settle in Sool province, which does not indicate majority status. Given the ambiguous nature of this quote, it should not be used in this article.

On your DRN submission, an author has suggested a moderator's opinion on the matter [118]. Seeing as this discussion has run well beyond its course, perhaps it is best to wait for them to weigh in on the subject; and we shall move from there. Koodbuur (talk) 01:38, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

I Agree. - Xargaga (talk) 03:34, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Somaliland. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304033252/http://ssctimes.com/?p=1447 to http://ssctimes.com/?p=1447
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130120162017/http://somaliareport.com/index.php/post/1299/Somalilands_Military_is_a_Shadow_of_the_Past_ to http://somaliareport.com/index.php/post/1299/Somalilands_Military_Is_A_Shadow_of_the_Past_

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:58, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Heesta Qaranka Somaliland.ogg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. Community Tech bot (talk) 17:51, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Demographics

This section needs filling. There is no break down of ethnic composition in the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:5059:2A00:5DAF:AECD:4A7E:FDA (talk) 04:21, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 16 December 2018

2A02:C7D:5059:2A00:5DAF:AECD:4A7E:FDA (talk) 04:13, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

The demographics section needs filling.There no mention of any ethnicities that make up the country.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 04:27, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Flag of South Azerbaijan.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:39, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 17 February 2019

I am from Somaliland and i would like to add many stuff as i had been there a lot of times 82.37.183.22 (talk) 19:38, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Great! Local knowledge can be helpful in interpreting sources (which you must also include for anything that is not just a typographical or other objective error). Just add another edit request, listing the exact changes you want, along with any supporting source information, and someone will review them and make the changes. I've also left some basic information for you about Wikipedia and how best to contribute to it on your talk page at this link. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:10, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 19 May 2019

197.156.95.50 (talk) 08:11, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

to add more information

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Jonesey95 (talk) 08:23, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 29 November 2019

I would like this as a reference to, "Other telecommunication firms serving the region include Somtel, Telcom and NationLink.[citation needed]". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jentacular (talk • contribs) 20:29, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

References

Expired security certificate. No thanks. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:43, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 31 January 2020

Please add Scholia template:

to the External Link section (=linkS to Scholia’s list of Somaliland publications). Thank you very much. Walkuraxx (talk) 11:07, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

 Not done:

That link redirects to spam site homeimprovement.com --Guy Macon (talk) 12:47, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

 Partly done Adding a sister project template is reasonable and compliant. I have added it to the "External links" section per template instructions and MOS. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:51, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Flag of Balochistan.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:54, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Somaliland National Anthem

Dear friends,

Since national anthems of all countries are played, I am wondering, beside lyrics, why Somaliland national anthem is not included. If you have difficulties to obtain the media file, I am willing to provide you a MIDI format. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.101.247.200 (talk) 08:48, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

I am also wondering this. The page Samo ku waar contains the anthem, but it is not located on this page. I will make an edit request. Sam1370 (talk) 02:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 11 March 2020

Can someone please add the Somaliland national anthem, already available on the page Samo ku waar, to the infobox? Thank you! Sam1370 (talk) 02:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

@Sam1370:  Done –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 16:09, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Sam1370 (talk) 23:55, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 25 March 2020

population is inaccurate, Hargeisa is about 1.9 million; Somaliland about 6.7 million. Zuldan777 (talk) 06:50, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. – Jonesey95 (talk) 13:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Flag of South Azerbaijan.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:55, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

internationally considered to be an autonomous region of Somalia

Dear friends,

There is no evidence or indications that Somaliland internationally considered to be an region of Somalia. It is true that Somaliland is located in the northwest of Somalia, but it is for reference to its location only?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Siirski (talk • contribs) 21:01, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

I assume you're questioning that it's internationally recognized, not as part of Somalia (which, of course, it's internationally recognized to be), but as an autonomous region of it. You're right that it isn't internationally recognized as a region of Somalia, because neither Somalia nor Somaliland consider it a region. Somalia considers the land it occupies to consist of five regions. If it isn't deemed internationally to be a region of Somalia (why would other countries dispute Somalia's administrative division of its land?), and if Somalia hasn't granted it autonomy, then how would it be recognized internationally as an autonomous region? Largoplazo (talk) 00:23, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Population figure

Hi@Cordless Larry:,

I have noticed that you have removed both citations (dated 2020) I provided stating Somaliland's population to be 4.5 million. Can you please clarify why you have removed this and replaced it with an older citation that says 3.5 million?

Thanks! Jacob300 (talk) 11:38, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, Jacob300, I think we were editing the article at the same time, resulting in an edit conflict. The UNPO source that you cited for the 4.5 million figure states that it's a 2013 estimate, whereas the 3.5 million figure I added comes from the Somaliland Department of Statistics and is for 2014. I suspect that the latter has been calculated based on the UN population survey, and replaced the previous, 2013, estimate. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:02, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

In fact, I now see that the previous version of the article reported a figure of 3.508 million based on adding up five regions' populations from the UN report. It was mislabelled as a 2017 population, which is what prompted me to remove it. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:09, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi@Cordless Larry:,

Thank you for clearing that up, all makes sense to me now. Jacob300 (talk) 14:09, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Somali

please change ((Somali)) to ((Somalis|Somali)) 2601:541:4500:1760:71D1:5B4E:C926:5B75 (talk) 14:52, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

 Done I disambiguated the link in the "name and etymology" section. Largoplazo (talk) 16:20, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

somali land

somali land is a self declared state internationaly considered as apart of somalia Siyaad soomaali (talk) 11:09, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

What are somalilands called in southern somalia ?

They are officially known as northern families or in somali Reer waqooyi. Ismail abdirahman gurei (talk) 20:38, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Languages

There is no official census on language in Somaliland however we can safely say Somali is spoken by all of the native population. The article also states most people are bi lingual and also know English / Arabic - I find this highly unlikely especially in rural nomadic areas. As I am from the region and have visited for extended periods many times I am familiar with languages spoken. Unless there are figures to back this that can be sited I think to stay inline with Wikipedia rules this should be removed or reworded.— Preceding unsigned comment added by N Jama (talk • contribs) 18:12, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2021

Nasir Abdi nor (talk) 10:35, 14 March 2021 (UTC)  not sovereign states but correctly  called the country

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 13:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Somaliland

'Sovereign state' not but correctly Country. Nasir Abdi nor (talk) 10:40, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Consensus request on 31 March 2021

I was told to make a consensus to get this change approved, but I'm not really sure if I'm doing it right. I'd like to request that this list of former Kingdoms in Somaliland are added to the infobox so people can easily see its former kingdoms.

| established_event1 = Kingdom of Punt | established_date1 = c. 2500–980 BCE | established_event2 = Macrobian Kingdom | established_date2 = c. 5th century BC | established_event3 = Establishment of the Ifat Sultanate | established_date3 = 940 | established_event4 = Establishment of the Adal Sultanate | established_date4 = 1415 AbdirahiimYa (talk) 00:20, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Please keep the discussion to one section above. CMD (talk) 01:37, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

But I thought that I should make a new section. Can you please tell me what the procedure to make a consensus is? AbdirahiimYa (talk) 12:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)