Jump to content

Talk:Alpha Condé

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Portraits

[edit]

I found his own photostream on Flickr [1]. Someone can contact him and ask to change the licence.--Александр Мотин (talk) 09:12, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Political views?

[edit]

What are Mr. Conde's political views and leanings? What are his political connections? -Pgan002 (talk) 07:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recommend more coverage of presidency

[edit]

There's a lot of election coverage but need of more coverage about his presidency. Faculty246 (talk) 02:00, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Alpha Condé. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:01, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alpha Condé. 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:

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) 19:11, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alpha Condé. 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:

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) 03:04, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV tag

[edit]

This article is overwhelmingly negative. The whole article does not discuss his policies, program, reform (including the recent constitutional reform) and political views, and basically only talks about his alleged election fraud and corruption scandals. Those controversial point are poorly sourced, and sometimes unsourced. Additionally, the section on his career before the presidency is too short and needs to be expanded beyond simply discussing his arrest and conviction. Mottezen (talk) 22:43, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no NPOV dispute: see Wikipedia:NPOV dispute: Everyone can agree that marking an article as having an NPOV dispute is a temporary measure, and should be followed up by actual contributions to the article in order to put it in such a state that people agree that it is neutral. I see no edits of the article by Mottezen since 22:43, 20 July 2020 (UTC), and I see no edit wars or talk page evidence of any NPOV editorial dispute existing. The tag is a year old. I will remove it. Those who wish to add complementary sourced content should do so. If there is difficulty obtaining consensus, then the tag can be added while trying to achieve editorial consensus. Boud (talk) 20:43, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are clearly some problems in the style of presenting some of the info - I did a few minimal edits to try improving this. I didn't search for sources for improving NPOV itself, which is a different issue. If my edits remain in place for some time, or are improved rather than reverted, then that confirms that there is (currently) no NPOV dispute; there is just a lack of editors with the time to add material. Boud (talk) 20:59, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I support the changes made by Boud as it helped resolve the way information was presented in the article. While more edits should be done (as with any article), I am comfortable that the changes do not run afoul of WP:NPOV. Jurisdicta (talk) 05:13, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Undue weight claim

[edit]

There is an undue weight claim in respect of the "surprising" win by Conde in 2010. I do not think the rererence is undue, indeed it could do with a bit of expanding so the context is more understandable. Conde scored 18% against Diallo's almost 44% in the first round. In such circumstances, for the lower placed candidate to win the runoff is indeed extraordinary. In this specific case, however, it may not have been as surprising as it seems at first rush. French figures such as Bernard Kouchner and other figures including Tony Blair persuaded interim president, Sekouba Konate, to delay the second round by six months. Konate was in due course appointed as a 3 star general to an African Union command (he had immediatly previously been an Army Captain so he was promoted up six ranks). Kouchner, Blair et al then used the six months to lobby the Malinke in particular and Konate used his own influence where he could. Conde's win in the second round was therefore rooted in his extensive international network and this made his subsequent tenure as president more brittle than it may have seemed on the surface. The international support continued during Conde's presidency - Blair provided staff to work in the presidental office. This was all contingent on the assumption that Conde was the West's kind of president. When Conde changed the constitution to run for a third term in 2020 (now in his eighties), this support fell away sharply and left him exposed; the brittleness of his position again become obvious. The reference to the "surprising" win is therefore not undue since it introduces an important detail about Conde's election which would become highly pertinent in his downfall. My view is that there should be a couple of sentences explaining all of this quite succinctly. These things above are all well known and evidenced so no original research is required; appropriate citations are plentiful. Any views, fellow Wikipedians? All the best, Emmentalist (talk) 08:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Alpha_Condé&oldid=1195369431"