Portal talk:Western Sahara

Western Sahara portal

Hi - I'd just like to compliment you on the quality of the Western Sahara portal you established today. It is always an excellent surprise to see portals of the quality of yours being added to the namespace, as opposed to the generally sub-standard portal we usually get. If this is maintained then a WP:FPORT nomination may well be in the wings... Deano (Talk) 15:10, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Koavf pushing Polisario's POV again and again!

Western Sahara is a territory disputed between Morocco and Polisario, each side has its own arguments which they think suffiscient, the UN is trying now to resolve the problem through a referundum. First of all, the problem is about neutrality of WP, the flag shown in this section is the flag used by one party of the conflict (polisario) and refused by the other (Morocco) and not recognized by the UN (the mediator in this conflict). There was an edit conflict about the infobox of Western Sahara page between me in one side and you and Arre in the other, a survey was necessary and the results are here and here. You see that the "no flags" option seems to be the least controversial solution, the "two flags" option was the second choice, displaying only one flag was the worst solution. Let's comply with WP principles of neutrality. You have to accept other side's opinions, stop your blind war edit. Daryou 18:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I fully agree with you Daryou, this is just ridiculously POV. It's aking to propaganda and I feel sorry this made its way on wikipedia. I currently can't spend much time scouting for inaccurate information and POV edits, but a quick browsing and a few searches show me that it's full of misinformation and omissions of very relevant facts. Very little (if any) is said about Algeria's fundamental role and interests in this whole issue. I can't find anything about the gradual defection of most of Polisario's historical leadership through political settlements. Things that are far from being consensual are presented as such. That no one reckonized Morocco's annexion is plain misinformation for example, most of the Arab League members did (though at least with the probable exception of Algeria), quite a few other African nations did, and there are certainly many others (I'd need to investigate to give an exhaustive list). --Yobaranut 04:42, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Koavf contradicting himself

Koavf, you are the founder of the WS Wiki Project. Nice job, YOU wrote that

• The goals of this project are to Standardize terminology related to Western Sahara/SADR Ensure that pages use the terms "Western Sahara", "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic", "Sahrawi", and "Polisario" correctly.
• "Western Sahara" is a region in Africa. It was formerly known as "Spanish Sahara", and is made up of Río de Oro and Sakiet el-Hamra. This region is known as the Southern Provinces in Moroccan literature; see also provinces of Morocco. The Kingdom of Morocco does not administer the entirety of the territory; the rest is known as the Free Zone. Please not that many sources will use the term "Western Sahara" to refer to the government the "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic", just as "France" refers to "French Republic".

Why are contradicting yourself? :) Daryou 22:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

===>Not a contradiction

Please not[e] [sic] that many sources will use the term "Western Sahara" to refer to the government the "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic", just as "France" refers to "French Republic".

Simple. :) Justin (koavf) 23:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

You said that the goals of this project are to Standardize terminology related to Western Sahara/SADR and Ensure that pages use the terms "Western Sahara", "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic", "Sahrawi", and "Polisario" correctly. And you defined "Western Sahara" as a region in Africa. You advised WP readers that many sources (you didn't say WP) could use the term "Western Sahara" to refer to the government the "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic". That is contradiction: you request to use terms correctly but you don't follow your own advise Daryou 23:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

===>Still not a contradiction Since other sources use it, it's viable to expect that users will use it, too. I want to standardize it, whcih means that it is not a standard as of yet. Justin (koavf) 23:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

But you requested to use the term correctly, and you definned it as a region, and you didn't provide your souces. Daryou 23:49, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

===>The term is used in more than one way As I explicitly stated, it does not only refer to the geographic definition. Sources for what? I'll give you two more neutral sources that refer to this as the "flag of Western Sahara":

• Geographica: The Complete Illustrated Atlas of the World published by Barnes and Noble, ISBN: 0760727147, p. 355
• The World Encyclopedia of Flags published by Hermes House, ISBN: 0681602805, p. 217

The former calls Western Sahara a "state" and the latter doesn't even include the phrase "Sahrawi Arab Democratic Repbulic" under "official name".

• Excuse me but you didn't respond to my first question: you requested to use the term correctly, and you definned it as a region,
• The definition of Western Sahara is "disputed territory", my sources:
  • Minurso
  • BBC
  • CIA facts book

No one of those sites uses the term WS to identify the SADR neither its flag. You see that I provide reliable, neutral and checkable internet sources. Can you do the same thing? Daryou 19:06, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

===>Here are several unbiased, checkable, Internet sources that have a "flag of Western Sahara." I found them within three minutes by typing "flag of Western Sahara" into a Google image search:

• Flags.net, one of the biggest flag resources on the Internet
• Flagspot, another one that I've previously cited and you ignored
• Law Guru, set up by the American Congress
• The National Biological Information Infrastructure, another cite by the U.S. government.

So now I'll revert it again. Justin (koavf) 20:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

My souces are more reliable and neutral than your "sources", So now I'll revert again. Daryou 22:22, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

===>Impossible Either you're neutral, or you aren't. It's impossible to be "more neutral" than someone else. It's like being more dead or less pregnant. Justin (koavf) 16:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Cool your collective jets lads

From [1] :

• Editorial note: The Moroccan government considers Western Sahara as a part of its own territory. This page does not necessarily imply any partiality on the territorial issue in question, as also doesn't the existence of our page about the flags of moroccan administrative divisions, among which Western Sahara is included.

The SADR flag is widely used (you can try and google this yourself) as the flag of Western Sahara. There is absolutely no problem with saying that it is widely used.

The only flag I have been able to find for the Southern Provinces is [2] for the Province of Boujdour. - FrancisTyers 23:39, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you, this flag is widely used as the flag of WS because there is a general confusion between WS (a disputed territory) and SADR (the self proclaimed Republic), the sources using this flag are either pro-polisario or ill-informed. The SADR isn't recognized by the UN and 147 states (over 192) neither is its flag. The conflict is under UN mediation, untill it's resolved, WP should be unbiased without any pro-polisario or pro-Moroccan stance. Daryou 16:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I think its perfectly reasonable to point out in the text that the flag is widely, although inaccurately used as the flag of Western Sahara and that the UN does not recognise this flag as the flag of Western Sahara. Something like:

The flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is commonly, although inaccurately, used as the flag of Western Sahara.

- FrancisTyers 16:13, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

===>Foreign relations of Western Sahara Bear in mind that there are legitimate governments that do recognize the SADR, so according to those sources, this is the flag of Western Sahara. Furthermore, a lack of recognition is not, nor does it imply, an illegitimacy toward the SADR. Justin (koavf) 16:33, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I completely agree with Francis, Remember that 45 countries recognize this flag but 147 don't. I think that 147 is much bigger than 45. By the same way lack of recognition of Moroccan souvreinty does not imply an illegitimacy toward the Moroccan territorial integrity. And what do you think about the 43 countries that cancelled or frozen their earlier recognition of the SADR (there isn't a big difference between 45 and 43). Let's be consistant. Daryou 16:41, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I did actually think of that _after_ I had posted Justin. How about this:

The flag of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) is commonly used as the flag of Western Sahara. Where the flag is used by one of the states that recognises SADR sovereignty of Western Sahara, this use is correct. Where the flag is not used by one of these states, this usage is incorrect.

- FrancisTyers 16:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I accept only if Koavf accepts. Daryou 17:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe some small changes to the wording (for instance using the term "usage" in both the second and third sentences), but yes, I would accept a caveat like that. Furthermore, the states that froze or cancelled their recogntion of the SADR are essentially irrelevant, and I don't think any one particular thing of them. Justin (koavf) 19:39, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Ok, cool. :) Feel free to reword it as you see fit. It might be worth posting it here first to elicit comments before changing anything though. - FrancisTyers 22:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive

Architecture of Africa is currently nominated on Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive. Come to this page and support it with your vote. Help us improve this article to featured status.--Fenice 08:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Literacy

Did you know...

* ...the Sahrawis in the Tindouf refugee camps are the most literate people in Africa, with the exception of the Boers of South Africa?

Including Ceuta, Melilla and the Canary Islands?  — [Unsigned comment added by 213.250.143.131 (talk • contribs).]

POV! : This is defintively a Propaganda Portal !

• This is not a Western Sahara Portal but a clearly pro-polisarian propaganda portal.
• Only the "sadr" and polisairo position is reflected here.
• A neutral point of view is totally absent.
• The moroccan point of view is also totally missing.
• I strongly dispute this article and will certainnly come back to update with the aim to balance.
• It is quite obvious to editors interested in the topic that Justin Koav is pushing pro-polisarian propaganda on Wikipedia.
• I think this must be discussed, more generally as this affects all articles related to Western Sahara and where Justin has contributed
• For the moment I put a POV on the article.

Cheers wikima 21:13, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Tag See Template:POV:

"Place {{POV}} at the top of the disputed article, then explain your reasons on the talk page of the disputed article. To specify the section of the talk page, use {{POV|talk page section name}} at the top of the disputed article." (emphasis added)

You need to explain yourself once you put on the tag, not just tag and run. The text as it is now is a product of mediation; did you review that discussion? Do you have anything to add to it? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 23:35, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

• I explained why I put a POV.
• If you want more no problem - this portal itself is just a one catastorphical POV:
• Other people and myself told that this is Wikipedia and not your web space to fight for "truth" and "indeopednence" of any things.
• It is time to look at the whole
• This is not only unfair towards Morocco and 30 millions of Moroccans but also damages heavily such a palce like Wikipedia.
• Don't revert this time as I will take it up to Wikipedia. I am tired of this polemical and revert game.
• Please understand!

My objections - Try to reasd thorugh, I have no time to formatt.

WS Portal:

Introduction

• In the text:

"Amnesty International and a number of experts in international law characterise this control as military occupation".

-> Missing: Morrocan Position on this

• In the text:

"The remainder is under the administration of the SADR".

-> This is highly dipsuted.

-> The discussion in the talk page of the so called "free zone" is not closed.

-> This "control" is highly limited

-> "sadr" is based in Tindouf and cannot administer an empty arid strip.

• In the text

"Colonized by Spain from 1884–1976 as Spanish Sahara, the process of decolonization was never completed"

-> Morocco claims it started the process of decolonisation

-> King Mohammed V visited WS in 1958 and promissed the people to free WS

• In the text:

"the native population, the Sahrawis, did not exercise their right to self-determination"

-> Moroccan people and all political parties and organisations in Morocco claim the Sahara is Moroccan

-> Currently Morocco is suggesting a large autonomy that offers selfdetermination Green March

Featured article

• Biase:

-> The article presents WS as if it was totally free and independent from the beginning of human existence. It is the most free region in the world!

-> This contains a contrediction since it shows that no regional central power has ever exited there, why?

-> Well because WS has been under explicit control of Morocco several times.

-> Even for the times when Moroccan central power was at its weak the ICJ admits that ties existed between sahrawi tribe and the Moroccan Sultan.

==> POV: Article need to be completly redited.

Did you know...

Biase, just biase:

-> This contains only POV from propolisarian propaganda perspective.

-> Did you klnow for example that polisarian officers burned Moroccan POWs alive with the help of algerian military?

-> Did you know that many of the responsibles from the highest level of Polisario joigned Morocco?

-> Did you know that the Polisario creator and all polisario top responsibles grew up and studied in Morocco?

-> Did you know that the father of M. abdelaziz the so called president of the so called "sadr" lives in Morocco, that he is a fanaitc militant for the marocanity of the Sahara and that he is member of the CORCAS?

-> Did you know that since M. Abdelaziz has been elected he never left the power in Polisario?

-> Did you know... lots of things that pro polisrian acitvists are hiding to you??

==> POV / Ok - This box will be completed!

Western Sahara Topics

• Pro polisarian propaganda:

-> The box says topics and not flags. So the so called "sadr" flag has nothing to do there.

-> The only flag that is existing and effectively used in Western Sahara is the Moroccan one

-> "sadr" is unrecognised by the UN, so its flag does not mean any thing.

-> Everyone can draw a flag joining colours for blood, brotherood and peace and claims it.

==> POV: Flag must be removed. It has nothing to do there

Information must be completed e.g.:

-> Add Morocco, CORCAS

-> Aplhabetical order (no reason to set Morocco at the end)

Web Resources

Almost all pro-polisario activist propaganda.

==> POV: Complete and balance. Alphabetical order is important

Western Sahara News

-> Almost all news from a pro-polisario propaganda point of view

-> Not even decisive moments such as the creation of CORCAS are mentionned.

-> Strong momenta such as the 5 days visit of the King to the region is only mentionned to say it happenned amid prostests although these were either invisible or totally ignored by the international community. The visit of the king was despite all a huge succes for him and the Moroccan State

-> Etc.

==> POV: Either balance news or delete the whole. Wikpiedia is not a place to disseminate propaganda news.

Selected Bigorpahy

-> We have ssen all bios now of Abdelaziz and others

-> It's time to balance

-> I will source an article of Oueld Rachid who is curently the personnality of this question.

==> Update biography

Quotes

-> The quote is definitively a political POV

-> We can source others that speak against separatisme and mercenaries

==> POV : Replace quotes by a more universal human one or delete.

Etc. etc...

Cheers wikima 18:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Much better This is far more helpful, and we can actually start a discussion with your particular issues. Just writing "this article is biased" does not explain how it is POV; your more recent post is particular and useful. That having been said, the odd and ungrammatical diatribe at the beginning is useless: just discuss the article. It would help more if you also gave proposed changes, but let me see what I can do:

Introduction

-> Missing: Morrocan Position on this

And what is that position? What are you going to put instead? Are you trying to say that the majority of Western Sahara is not occupied?

-> This is highly dipsuted.

Who disputes this?

-> "sadr" is based in Tindouf and cannot administer an empty arid strip.

The SADR is based in Tindouf and does administer the Free Zone, which includes villages, settlements, and bedouins.

"Colonized by Spain from 1884–1976 as Spanish Sahara, the process of decolonization was never completed"

-> Morocco claims it started the process of decolonisation

-> King Mohammed V visited WS in 1958 and promissed the people to free WS

Your objections don't contradict the text. The text as it is is true and the position of the United Nations (among many others.)

"the native population, the Sahrawis, did not exercise their right to self-determination"

-> Moroccan people and all political parties and organisations in Morocco claim the Sahara is Moroccan

This also doesn't contradict the text and is irrelevant to what is stated.

-> Currently Morocco is suggesting a large autonomy that offers selfdetermination Green March

Right, but the statement is still true. I have no idea why the words "Green March" are on the end of this phrase.

Featured article

If you have some problem with the article History of Western Sahara, that talk page is the appropriate place to explain your issues. This space is made for the portal itself.

Did you know...

-> This contains only POV from propolisarian propaganda perspective.

-> Did you klnow for example that polisarian officers burned Moroccan POWs alive with the help of algerian military?

-> Did you know that many of the responsibles from the highest level of Polisario joigned Morocco?

-> Did you know that the Polisario creator and all polisario top responsibles grew up and studied in Morocco?

-> Did you know that the father of M. abdelaziz the so called president of the so called "sadr" lives in Morocco, that he is a fanaitc militant for the marocanity of the Sahara and that he is member of the CORCAS?

-> Did you know that since M. Abdelaziz has been elected he never left the power in Polisario?

-> Did you know... lots of things that pro polisrian acitvists are hiding to you??

Okay. Did you actually have any evidence to contradict the facts presented? Do you have any evidence to support your assertions? I tried to keep from bombast on the did you know section, but if you want to put in comments like "Did you know that Morocco napalmed innocent women and children as they fled to refugee camps," we can do that, too.

Western Sahara Topics

-> The box says topics and not flags. So the so called "sadr" flag has nothing to do there.

Cleary, the flag of Western Sahara does have something to do with Western Sahara.

-> The only flag that is existing and effectively used in Western Sahara is the Moroccan one

That's not true; the flag of the SADR/Polisario/Western Sahara and the UN flag fly in the Sahara.

-> "sadr" is unrecognised by the UN, so its flag does not mean any thing.

That's a useless statement. I could just as easily write "SADR are recognized by the African Union, so it does mean something." Why would you waste my time with something like this?

-> Everyone can draw a flag joining colours for blood, brotherood and peace and claims it.

This is also meaningless.

Information must be completed e.g.:

-> Add Morocco, CORCAS

How so? If you wrote up a proposed text, that would help. Otherwise, I can try one.

-> Aplhabetical order (no reason to set Morocco at the end)

Are you talking about the categories? If so, I agree that we should use alphabetical order, apart from the main category.

Web Resources

If you have a good site to add, please do.

Western Sahara News

-> Not even decisive moments such as the creation of CORCAS are mentionned.

CORCAS was created in the '70's as I recall. If you have a news item to add, please do. Bear in mind, if it's not sourced, it will be removed.

Selected Bigorpahy

There aren't many good biographies on Wikipedia of persons associated with the Sahara. Even the current one isn't featured article-status. If you have another good one, feel free to replace the old one.

Quotes

-> The quote is definitively a political POV

So? It was made by a politician.

-> We can source others that speak against separatisme and mercenaries

If you have germane, cited quotes, feel free to add them.

Again, the best way to make progress is to have a proposed text to replace the current one. If you can write up one, that would be great. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 18:55, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

• The POV is now on
• If you would feel less obliged to always give lessons to others that would be helpful.
• The whole "portal" is full of POVs, it is a shame for Wikipedia to become such a bin for cheap pro-polisarian propaganda.
• So you will need to wait. I am not employed in Wikipedia and do changes in my private time

wikima 20:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Huh? "The POV is now on?" What? I am also not employed by Wikipedia, in case you thought I was a member of the Wikimedia Foundation. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 00:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

• That means that the POV tag is now on the page and will stay until we sort this out.
• I would never dare to think that the wikipedia foundation would employ someone who "fights" for the "truth" or for the independence of any fictive entity in this world.
• And now I will not respond to any your personal comments but will look at how to correct and update the page. It is polluting Wikipedia.

Cheers wikima 04:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Rude I know that you haven't the native grasp on English that I do, so I'll assume this was a good-faith mistake, but your post was rude and my previous one wasn't. Just stop being rude. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 04:01, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Rude What was rude in wikima's words? the fact that you say clearly that you are here to fight for the "truth" and will do your utmost to "free Western Sahara"?. If those words are rude they are signed by you koavf in your own user page. So look at what the TRUTH Wikima is putting in front of your eyes, not to his spelling mistakes, which everyone does.--A Jalil 09:33, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Rude again Some would also say that it's rude to intrude on this conversation; Wikima's a big boy and doesn't need you to defend him. It's rude to use sarcasm quotes and mock the things that I believe in, and it's rude to say that something I created is polluting Wikipedia. I would be happy to look at the TRUTH that Wikima puts in pages, but so far I haven't seen much. In point of fact, he's on Wikipedia to almost exclusively delete material from pages. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 14:33, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

POV page

The portal is too POV. (see comments on Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Western Sahara) I therefore deleted 3 POV sections.S710 07:58, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Multiple views need to be acknowledged without bias

Any discussion about Western Sahara quickly degenerates into a near-hysterical shouting match between those who believe it should be part of Morocco and those that support Sahrawi independence under the leadership of the Polisario, and unfortunatley this has happened here on Wikipedia. The material on Western Sahara needs to recognise that there are conflicting claims to the territory, and that the territory remains disputed and is effectively partitioned. Most of the territory is under Moroccan control, and the Moroccan flag may presumably be seen widely in this zone, which is referred to by the Polisario and many Sahrawi, but not by Morocco or Moroccans, as the "Occupied Territories". However, there is a sizeable (but much smaller) portion of Western Sahara that is controlled by the Polisario, and in this zone the Polisario flag is seen frequently.

The flag used by the Polisario is the flag of the self-proclaimed SADR, which is recognised by a number of developing countries and most African nations (the figures need to be checked and kept updated). I'm not sure how many countries explicitly recognise Morocco as the legitimate authority in Western Sahara (again check and update), but I believe the numbers who recognise Morocco's jurisdiction and the numbers that recognise the Polisario's authority are comparable. Many other countries do not have an official position, although may effectively support one side or the other. Some of the comments here are trying to push a POV by comparing recognition of one side's position with non-recognition - if we are interested in this sort of comparison the figures that should be compared are countries explicitly recognising the Polisario position with those explicitly recognising the Moroccan position.

The SADR and the territory of Western Sahara are equivalent as far as the Polisario and those countries who recognise their sovereignty are concerned. To the UN, who remain officially neutral, and to any actors who do not recognise Polisario authority, the SADR and Western Sahara are not equivalent. Surely this can be stated firmly and without any danger of bias towards one side or another.

Both sides in the conflict accuse each other of human rights abuses and general bad behaviour. Some of these accusations have a basis and some (many) do not. The best approach here is to list the _accusations_ and point to reports from independent bodies on the human rights situation.

This really shouldn't be a difficult section to write - it's a pity that it appears to have been infiltrated by people who are blatantly partisan. We all have our views on the conflict, and I have mine, but if we are to present accurate information we have to distance ourselves from our own views. If we do not, it will be obvious that a lot of the material is propaganda and counter-propaganda, and the Western Sahara material will not be trusted. Pushing a POV is counterproductive.

We have to forget about who are the good guys and who are the bad guys and be as objective as possible, acknowledging that there are conflicting points of view.

A little more emotional distance - please!

Something that I discovered very recently that might be of interest is that the Moroccan wall or berm is not restricted to within the territory of Western Sahara, but actually extends into Mauritania, contrary to how it is depicted on maps, including the MINURSO map. You can see it on Google Earth.

Nickbrooks 18:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

POV issues

Separate sections I've restored the deleted sections to this portal, but not their content. If you have a problem with a POV issue in a given section, the talk page of that section is the most appropriate place for it. If you have a POV problem with the Portal per se, here is the best place to discuss it. I'm assuming the latter is not the case. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 14:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

helping out the people in western sahara

I think that if we all helped out in western sahara to make things better for the people in western sahara. We could give them money if you really think about it when you say that you have no money and that you only have a couple of dollars they dont even have that i mean we cant even imagine how the poor people in western sahara live out there but yet we still dont care i mean look how we livin we have it good when out in western sahara they have boms out there everyday and policemen that are way worser than ours so all im sayin is that there is a lot of people in western sahara that need some help and so all we have to do is care more and stop thinkin abot our selfs because they go through a lot more stuff than we do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.74.66.149 (talk) 05:07, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

The Portal should be renamed

Hi,

This is rather "Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic Portal" than "Western Sahara Portal". The portal is not about the territory but related to the POV of one of the two belligerents, the POLISARIO. The Portal, by its style and content is far from neutrality. Thus the portal should definitely renamed to "SADR Portal" or "POLISARIO Portal"

Wimmiden (talk) 12:50, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

I am about to undo this move, partly because the related article is titled "Western Sahara", but mainly because the move has broken the formatting of the portal completely. If you think the move is not contentious, please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Moving a page#Moving a portal to get admin help with the move. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:27, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

@Tsarisco: Same again! -- John of Reading (talk) 06:37, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

• Agree - certainly Portal:Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic.GreyShark (dibra) 17:57, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Notice from the Portals WikiProject

WikiProject Portals is back!

The project was rebooted and completely overhauled on April 17th, 2018. Its goals are to revitalize the entire portal system, make building and maintaining portals easier, support the ongoing improvement of portals and the editors dedicated to this, and design the portals of the future.

As of May 2nd, 2018, membership is at 60 editors, and growing. You are welcome to join us.

There are design initiatives for revitalizing the portals system as a whole, and for improving each component of portals. So far, 2 new dynamic components have been developed: Template:Transclude lead excerpt and Template:Transclude random excerpt.

Tools are provided for building and maintaining portals, including automated portals that update themselves in various ways.

And, if you are bored and would like something to occupy your mind, we have a wonderful task list.

From your friendly neighborhood Portals WikiProject. Hope to see you there. Sincerely,    — The Transhumanist   07:50, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Portal expanded

This portal has been updated and expanded in 2019. Additional articles for the portal can be considered from those available in the table listed below. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:02, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Western Sahara articles by quality and importance
Quality	Importance
	Top	High	Mid	Low	NA	???	Total
FA				12			12
GA				12		1	13
B	5	4	1	10		4	24
C	14	8	5	49		22	98
Start	16	16	32	171		132	367
Stub		1	10	83		67	161
List	1	2	5	11		11	30
Category					429		429
Disambig					4		4
Portal					25		25
Project					24		24
Redirect	2			4	347		353
Template					65		65
NA	1			1	95		97
Other					2		2
Assessed	39	31	53	353	991	237	1,704
Total	39	31	53	353	991	237	1,704
WikiWork factors (?)		ω = 3,291			Ω = 4.88

@Northamerica1000: Even tho you are a continent thousands of miles away, you have done good work on this portal. Thank you and شكرا. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:20, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Koavf. I specialize in geographic/historical country topics, those regarding food and drink, as well as others. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:27, 22 September 2019 (UTC)