Jump to content

Talk:ISI: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m moved Talk:Isi Amengual to Talk:ISI over redirect: revert to disambiguation page
support merge
Line 16: Line 16:
This is all you had to do, provide proof. I'd still argue that this is not a commonly used term, and the initialism is used even less frequently. However, this counts as evidence of its use--although I'd recommend finding more than a passing comment in a brief news story--but as you said, this is a new development. [[User:ND Conservative|ND Conservative]] 02:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
This is all you had to do, provide proof. I'd still argue that this is not a commonly used term, and the initialism is used even less frequently. However, this counts as evidence of its use--although I'd recommend finding more than a passing comment in a brief news story--but as you said, this is a new development. [[User:ND Conservative|ND Conservative]] 02:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


== Merge ==
In response to the proposal to merge Isi into ISI, '''Merge''' as the current "Search" function, for me brought up just Isi and not ISI which contributed to confusion for me. [[User:Rkmlai|rkmlai]] ([[User talk:Rkmlai|talk]]) 18:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
In response to the proposal to merge Isi into ISI, '''Merge''' as the current "Search" function, for me brought up just Isi and not ISI which contributed to confusion for me. [[User:Rkmlai|rkmlai]] ([[User talk:Rkmlai|talk]]) 18:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

: I also support '''merge''' [[Isi]] into [[ISI]]. --[[Special:Contributions/68.0.124.33|68.0.124.33]] ([[User talk:68.0.124.33|talk]]) 15:25, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:25, 9 April 2011

WikiProject iconDisambiguation
WikiProject iconThis disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.

Listings

Is it truly necessary to list every three word combination that starts ISI, or shouldn't this page be for the common meanings of the acronym ISI. While it is not uncommon for nations to use letters (USA, UK, USSR, DPROK, ROC, etc), for a claimed de facto nation that has no news sources using the phrase "Islamic State of Iraq." Find a legit source--using the initialism ISI--and then it should be on here. Same really goes for the rest of the listings. ND Conservative 18:45, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Click on CNN videos and listen to the report of the recent downing of the helicopter. At the very end he uses the phrase ISI for the Islamic State of Iraq. It exists and it's very important since they own large portions of Iraq and have their own separate government. They are the insurgency now. Other insurgency acronyms are mentioned on disambiguous pages like the RUF and MILF. It doesn't make sense that this is an exception when it's probably the most widely known insurgency group in the world. Richard Cane 03:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I followed your suggestion but I did not hear ISI or Islamic State of Iraq mentioned anywhere on the CNN videos still available for free. If "Islamic State of Iraq" is worthy of a wikipedia entry, it should be rather easy to find in news sources. Furthermore, even if the term exists, that does not mean ISI is a commonly used initialism. The two examples you mentioned are documented entities. So are the IRA, ETA, the PLO, and the KKK. The only source listed on the page is the SITE Institute, whose credibility is less than stellar. Small non-profits with an agenda are not entitled to create a terrorist entity. And yet, I say all this without concluding that the Islamic State of Iraq does not exist. It would not surprise me if a terrorist group in Iraq made such a claim. Based on the websites that are forwarding the claim, I would more likely conclude that it is a claim that is barely worth mentioning. My original complaint does not question the Islamic State of Iraq entry, but rather that ISI is a commonly used initialism for Islamic State of Iraq. I await legitimate proof. Best, ND Conservative 00:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Watch the video by Michael Holmes titled "Insurgents: We downed chopper". At about 2:54 he refers to it as the ISI. Search on February 9th when it came out. Here's a transcript if you can't find it [1].

And that was what was suggested by General Peter Pace a little while ago on CNN. But if this indeed is a heat-seeking missile and, indeed, striking the CH-46 that went down on Wednesday, it's a disturbing new development in terms of the armory available to the ISI, the Islamic State of Iraq

Also, all the examples you provided are groups that go back decades. The Islamic State of Iraq was just formed a few months ago so of course it isn't yet common vernacular. Richard Cane 07:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is all you had to do, provide proof. I'd still argue that this is not a commonly used term, and the initialism is used even less frequently. However, this counts as evidence of its use--although I'd recommend finding more than a passing comment in a brief news story--but as you said, this is a new development. ND Conservative 02:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

In response to the proposal to merge Isi into ISI, Merge as the current "Search" function, for me brought up just Isi and not ISI which contributed to confusion for me. rkmlai (talk) 18:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also support merge Isi into ISI. --68.0.124.33 (talk) 15:25, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]