Talk:Ogaden National Liberation Front

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Ethiopia (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethiopia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ethiopia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Military history (Rated C-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
C This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality assessment scale.

How to discuss this page?[edit]

I'm new to wikipedia. Bayantree I would appreciate if you told me how to make constructive changes to this article. Because it is extremely filled with bias view. I want to make changes I don't know how to contact you to tell you all the things wrong with this article. In fact there are just too many to mention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkfarah (talkcontribs) 01:49, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Mkfarah, First there is a hierarchy of sourcing on Wikipedia. Content that has no citations (aka footnotes) is considered worse than content with citations, while, for citations, peer reviewed sources are better than mainstream publications, which are better than blogs or smaller partisan presses. You have been removing content with citations in favor of content without citations, which is reverted as a matter of course.
I recommend that you start small and improve a particular paragraph that you feel is unbalanced. This can be done either by using more reliable sources or by noting that the wording of the Wikipedia content is not supported by the given citation. For example, if a sentence is supported by a small press with a partisan agenda but contradicted by the BBC then, generally speaking, you can simply change the citation and reword the sentence to that supported by the more reliable source. If you cannot find a better source explicitly debunking a content you think is wrong, leave the sentence alone. The onus is on you to prove that content with sources is erroneous. Given that you have not yet done this sort of detailed editing, it is impossible to take your assertions of widespread imbalance at face value.
Long-time Wikipedia editors with established reputations as knowledgeable and experienced in their particular field of editing can on rare occasions make appeals to their credibility when editing uncontested topics, but your account doesn't have nearly the background needed to make a "I know better than this source but can't prove it right now" sort of assertion. Thanks, BanyanTree 02:10, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
i have a problem with the citations. In the paragraph "Somali death" or victims of the ONLF you cite TPLF allegations against the ONLF. you put that citation first and it reads "onlf throws grenade into crowd" (come on.... isn't that bias) considering that the ONLF refuted the allegation. NO real proof exist to connect the ONLF to that tragedy. The onlf has repeatedly claimed that the TPLF threw the grenades at the public to later blame it on the ONLF. This is the TPLF's strategy to put the ONLF on U.S. terrorism list. but it's not a terrorist organization. You almost paint a picture of a terrorist Organization not that of a liberation organization. your presentation and your sources are very very bias. Furthermore, the OHRC isn't connected to the ONLF at all. The OHRC has repeatedly refuted this allegation yet you and company present that as being true. You present no evidence of the linkage. Further, you don't talk about how the ONLF tried to succeed from Ethiopia threw referendum. You don't mention that at all. I would request that you make SERIOUS changes to the article because from reading it, I could swear it was hand written by meles zenawi himself.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mkfarah (talkcontribs)
First, please sign your posts. You can either type four tildes (~s) yourself or click the button on the topic of the edit window that looks like a signature.
Second, we don't have a company. Wikipedia is a not for profit organization that is run almost entirely by people volunteering their time.
Third and most significant, you still don't seem to understand content disputes are largely resolved by using reliable sources. Make your assertions in the article using sourcing. Pick one paragraph and try to improve it, including by offering counterpoints to assertions that you feel are misleading. If you can't do that, then there is very little hope that anyone would entrust you with rewriting the whole article. - BanyanTree 12:01, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Terrorism?[edit]

User:Mkfarah removed the {{WikiProject Terrorism}} template from this talk page. I think this should have been mentioned either on this page, or in the edit summary. Having said that, I'm not sure the ONLF article qualifies for inclusion (without even getting into problems with the term "terrorism" itself). From what I can tell, inclusion in WikiProject Terrorism is based on an article being listed at List of designated terrorist organizations. That list, in turn, cites MIPT Terrorism Knowledge Base as its source. But that web site indicates that the ONLF has not been designated a terrorist group by the US, the UK, the EU, Canada, Australia, or Russia. But the WikiProject's threshold for inclusion is not clear to me, so as of right now, I don't have a problem if this article is not included. (And I guess I should mention that I'm only referring to the article, and not my own views about the group itself, which do not belong here in any case.) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm an established skeptic of labeling organizations "terrorist", by some fluke managing to get Category:Terrorist organizations deleted many moons ago after becoming annoyed at the people whose only edits to various African rebel group articles was adding them to the category. I'm not familiar with the WikiProject but, for what it's worth, am ok with removing the tag. - BanyanTree 04:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality of this article in dispute[edit]

I'm very concerned about the neutrality of this article. It is EXTREMELY unevenhanded. There are a lot of so-called external sources missing. The anti-ONLF sources all seem to be Ethiopian Goverment websites and/or known affiliates thereof. There is an extreme lack of historical content. A particular "source" that I visited actually wasn't even a report it was a bloc. This is utterly disturbing. I'm challenging the neutrality of this page because it is clearly anti-ONLF and PRO-TPLF. There is no mention that the ONLF was a participant in the june 1991 conference in Addis Ababa that saw the transitional charter come to effect. There is no mention that the TPLF (EPRDF) stormed the town of gabri dahar in 1995 killing 81 people in their vein attemt to assasinate the ONLF political leadership. There isn't a mention that the so called Ethiopia constitution provides the framework for a political referendum to see succession but that the TPLF has steadfast denied the people of the Somali State to exercise that right. Furthermore, all of the TPLF's claims seem to be repeated in this article as being confirmed/true and the ONLF's claims are labelled as "allegation" "accusations" etc. This is dangerous manipulation of the English language. This article needs SERIOUS SERIOUS reworking. I'm going to work on it. And let you folks judge the differenceMkfarah 01:38, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Mkfarah, I have just done you (and the article) a favor and tagged the article with {{NPOV}}. If you are able to attribute sources that corroborate what the TPLF did do, and/or what the ONLF did not do, then feel free to add this information to the article. Since October 5 (when you posted these comments), your edits merely consist of deleting, then restoring, then again deleting a quote and its source. In the meantime, you left yet another rant on my talk page accusing me of supporting the TPLF. I think everyone here is interested in improving the article but, speaking for myself, you give very little (if any) incentive for wanting to help you in your efforts. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:41, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, it appears that we have left the discussion stage of the dispute. Anyone else for removing the POV template until someone who can improve an article, as opposed to rant about how bad the current version is, shows up to make an argument? - BanyanTree 08:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC) 09:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC):::BAnyantree i would gladly contribute to this article but I don't have much time. I see that i'm competing with full-time TPLF agents probably working from Mekelle. I is clearly bias. There is no doubt about it. I could give Phd Thesis, books online essays, news article, all CREDIBLE AND REAL sources including the new york times, LA times, Voice of America, BBC, doctors without borders, UN, OHRC, Human Rights Watch, Red Cross, Newsweek Mag, etc etc. But who cares about these sources right we have Washington based lobbyist Peter Pham to speak for the TPLF and HE is cited as the "credible" source. There is no mention of the ethnic cleansing that's going on in the Ogaden, there is no mention of the TPLF's occupation of Badme, a UN declared Eritrean village, No mention of the TPLF invasion and occupation of a sovereign state. In the article it's said as "Ethiopia's entry into the conflict in Somalia" So i figured I can't spare nearly as much time so i'd just let people know that it's lies. Everything in this article is a lie. If you don't believe what i'm saying go visit the articles about the following groups and you'll see a common trend: Coalition for unity and democracy, Oromo Liberation Front, Ethiopian people's patriotic front, ARDUF, tigray people democratic movement, Union of islamic courts, and much more. You'll discover that TPLF agents sit on their monitors all day and night and spread this bullshit propaganda all over the web. It's part of new "information ministry's" program of western deception. Go to youtube and what i'm saying to you will become evident. I mean by western standard we're more media literate and you'll be able to tell that it's staged propaganda. i just wanna put it out there that this article is a lie. it's pretty late. 09:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Haha! <sarcasm> I have been elevated to the level of "full-time TPLF agent"! I feel honored. </sarcasm> If you wish to fix the problems in the article, go ahead, but do not just put a huge message in it saying that it is pure propaganda. Thank you. --Mark (Mschel) 09:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
You have been blocked for vandalism and your credibility is zero. Does someone who is not a vandal have an opinion? - BanyanTree 09:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I do not see any POV, so unless we find some, I say 86 the tag. --Mark (Mschel) 09:46, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I personally think the article could use some work in terms of balance, but right now I have zero (or less) motivation to work on it (see my previous comments on this page). Given the anonymous user's threat ("you're not gonna stop me… tell everybody i know to do the same thing.… i'm gonna make this your full time occupation"), I suggest that we semi-protect the article should another round of similar edits occur. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 13:32, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I guess I'm in the same boat. I only watch this article because it vaguely related to my work on Ogaden War and I thought that the user would actually edit, as opposed to ranting about how bad everything was and then accusing us of being part of a vast conspiracy. This certainly is not my first priority for updating. OK, the POV tag stays until someone who is motivated and capable of basic editing practice shows up.
I would recommend a block on sight policy for similar rants and then semi-pro as a last resort. Cheers, BanyanTree 19:49, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello everybody. I'm not ethiopia but I have a friend from Ogaden. I live in Ontario, Canada. I have recently become aware of the ONLF struggle with Ethiopia. I did some priliminary research into the conflict and from what I have learned Ethiopia is a colonial power in the region. The power base in Ethiopia has largely been dominated by a minority northern ethnic groups (the abbysinians largely). This is the same nation that invaded Ethiopia and assumed the name of the former (as a sort of political umbrella). This article lacks the historical depth to explain the reason behind the ONLF's struggle to liberate the Ogaden from Abbysinian occupation. I would like to add that this article is without any doubt in mind riddle with racial undertones and bias views. It is not factual in it's historical accuracy nor is it balanced in it's presentation of the present situation. I just wanted to say that because it is something that need to be worked on seriously. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

This article contains contaminited stories that are not true. For instance reference (12-16) to the section " Ogadenia confusion" has nothing to do what have been writting in the section. It's not Somalis belonging to the Ogaden-clan or ONLF this matter who nnamed the region "Ogaden". The region was called Ogaden well before the Abbassian occupeid. The person who wrote this section called it "southeast Ethiopia" and thereby he/she what been writting in history books. This section bee deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anfaal (talkcontribs) 22:42, 29 October 2007

Anfaal, the "Ogadenia confusion" section is indeed problematic. However, given the contention surrounding this article, removing the entire section as you did with no meaningful edit summary nor talk page comments quickly aroused suspicion; after five such unexplained removals, you found yourself blocked. It would be inaccurate to say that the entire section and its sources are false, but I agree it has been presented in a very biased manner. The Alpeyrie source (itself an opinion piece) does not claim that "the ONLF labeled the whole Somali region 'Ogadenia' in reference to its Ogaden sub-clan that makes up the highest percentage of the region" - in fact it does not even mention the word "clan" (the citation itself is ironic, given Alpeyrie's pro-ONLF bias). The Telegraph article does mention the Ogaden clan, but says it makes up "about half" of the local population. A previous editor conflated the two labelings of the area as "Ogadenia" and "Ogaden"; the latter is very common among different maps, and predates the existence of the ONLF (example: 1972 map). But some editor(s) cited several maps that use the "Ogaden" label, and claimed the ONLF influenced this labeling; this is inaccurate. I do suspect bias on the part of the editor(s) responsible (it might be a different matter were these maps actually labeled "Ogadenia"), but in any case, it was inaccurate and I've removed the references. (I was also suspicious about someone labeling a URL with "Divisions and anti-ONLF sentiment among local Somali population" rather than the title of the article, which is " Ethiopia's 'secret war' forces thousands to flee".) At the same time, I am not sure that Ogaden's borders have ever been even informally defined, but I am quite positive it is inaccurate to say that the Somali Region and Ogaden are one and the same (the latter actually lies within the former); a BBC map did make this mistake but, again, to attribute this to the ONLF is inaccurate (if I'm wrong, then we need a source that corroborates the ONLF's influence upon mapmaking). On the other hand, it is true that not all of the area's inhabitants hail from the Ogaden tribe and the naming of the area vs. the name of a particular clan does warrant mention, thus I have left part of the section in place rather than completely remove it. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:30, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I just did a little more work. I've removed the Alpeyrie source and I provided more information about how the area is labeled on maps. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:45, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

One thing I'd like to add, speaking as a frequent contributor to articles about Ethiopia & the neighboring countries, is that I frequently fall back to quoting TPLF (& Ethiopian official) sources is not because I believe them uncritically (although in some cases I do) but because I can't find anything else that fits under Wikipedia's guidelines. We need a source that anyone else can examine to support assertions in Wikipedia articles: books, magazine articles, websites, etc. I know that there are other sources out there, but due to limits on my time, I can't always examine them, let alone know that they exist. I also know that in some cases the material does not exist in the West, so I try to be understanding & lenient. If you care about the subject, please help identify these sources & bring them to our attention -- either by linking to them in the article, or posting about them here. Or even better, try to help integrate that information into the article, while leaving a pointer to where someone else can find it. -- llywrch 23:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Gyrofrog: Thanks for your wise comment. And i'm sorry that have violate the rule of the wikipedia by remove the hole section, i was not aware that rule. I now have edited and I assume that eding is allowed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anfaal (talkcontribs) 20:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Coming back to this: Anfaal's edit added unattributed text, some of which duplicates what was already in the section. The Mohamed Mohamud Abdi citation would seem to be his opinion (or in any case, it appears that way, as presented; I haven't seen the text) so I have clarified that this is his assertion (irrespective of whether I agree or disagree with it). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

While I doubt the article is perfect, failing to list TPLF actions / mistakes isn't a concern for this article. I've removed the NPOV template, please use {{POV-section}} for sections or {{POV-statement}} for problematic sentences, then please detail issues here. This will help address them in a timely manner. - RoyBoy 03:42, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Kenyan Somalis[edit]

This edit has been added twice and reverted twice, by Gyrofrog and myself. The problems, as I see it, are:

  1. The apparent citation is a map that shows Somalis in Kenya but doesn't address the assertion made in the article at all
  2. This is a rather random assertion to make without sources. Why exactly does an Ethiopian separatist group need to take a policy stance on the situation in another country?

The user in question states, "There are some things that are so obvious that people don't have to give a list of hard reference for them," which is directly addressed in the core policy Wikipedia:Verifiability: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." If you can't provide a backing citation when challenged, you can't include it, even if it's obviously true. - BanyanTree 05:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I would have liked to finish discussing with that one person (Gyrofrog) to get his response for my last comment so that it won't go back and forth. I would like to have Gyrofrog's response to my comment. As you can see these articles {Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, Kenya etc etc} they virtually have paragraphs and paragraphes and paragraphes of unreferenced statements. (PLEASE CHECK THEM and THOUSANDS OF OTHER AFRICAN ARTICLES) I think you would need a few days or few weeks to clean all that up (search refences for every SINGLE unreferenced statements on endless number of African articles) if you are going to say obvious statements need extensive references. As i explained in my talk page by giving an example, it is obvious America is not in a war with Canada today. Such things (that USA and Canada are not currently in a bloody war) are so obvious that i can promise not to force you to add a reference to write that statement. For us Africans, we ALSO have obvious facts here and there that all sides don't even dispute at all because, again, it is just so obvious.

You also said "Why exactly does an Ethiopian separatist group need to take a policy stance on the situation in another country?" MY ANSWER: you obviously need to check more about the topic because the ONLF says its people are not Ethiopians, they are Ogaden group who are "colonized" by Ethiopians. Please look up anywhere online to find this other obvious thing or randomly pick any African to tell you since this is a given. So in case you don't know, ONLF is fighting to liberate Ogaden people, which happen to live in both Ethiopia and Kenya. I hope i answered your question. Again, we would need to re-write or delete virtually thousands of thousands of African articles on Wikipedia if "backing citation" is needed in every single African sentence. I hope you understand. Please don't move this discussion to another page again so we don't have to keep starting discussion from scratch. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:49, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't know where you are getting this 'Ogaden includes Kenya' bit, as one would think that would be included in the Ogaden article, which instead has a citation for the fact that the border of Ogaden is partially defined by Kenya, which is the opposite of what you claim. If it's so obvious, then it should be no problem to provide a citation. If you really wanted me to provide a backing citation to the statement that "The US is not at war with Canada", here one is, proven by exclusion as Canada does not appear on the list. Also, you are very close to breaking the WP:3RR. - BanyanTree 06:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

"I don't know where you are getting this 'Ogaden includes Kenya' bit, as one would think that would be included in the Ogaden article" YOU see, if you were reading the discussions and the statements and reference BEFORE YOU REVERT, you would have realized the fact that Ogadens are in Kenya is starring you in your face!! <<--- A reference i provided THREE REVERTS AGO! By the way, i hope you are not purposely trying to annoy me!! I don't want a citation that Canada is not in war with USA. EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT!! Just like everyone knows that ONLF IS NOT IN WAR WITH KENYA!! Hey, i heard some claim George Bush is not a woman!! Find a reference that proves that he is not a woman! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:13, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

You do realize that "Somalis" and "Ogadens" are not synonyms, right? I recommend the articles Ogaden and Somali people for background reading on the distinction. Also, considering Ogaden has a citation to a peer reviewed academic article stating that Ogaden doesn't include Kenya, you have precisely zero chance of getting a statement that implies the opposite into this article.
Also, gender proved by the use of the pronoun "he" in the first line. - BanyanTree 06:26, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
You do realise that he was talking not about Ogaden the geographical region but about the Ogaden (clan). And the Ogaden (clan) article states that THERE ARE Ogadens in Kenya. The article about Kenyan Minister of Defence Mohamed Yusuf Haji states that he 's from Ogaden clan of Somalis. You didn't try to understand what he said and push your ignorance on that perticular matter. (talk) 05:53, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Removing links to American Chronicle[edit]

From my examination of this website, American Chronicle is not a reliable source, for simple reason that they will publish anything with minimal editorial review. My opinion is supported the consensus formed by this discussion in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam. The material I have removed includes:

  • "Some analysts argue that the Ogaden Human Rights Committee (OHRC)... is its diplomatic wing" -- Statement only supported by an article at American Chronicle.
  • "Around 1995, the OHRC was established. This human rights organization, widely regarded as being partisan, also uses its connections to demand international condemnation of all government reactions to ONLF's insurgency." -- Although one source cited here confirms that the OHRC condemned the Ethiopian government, the only source which ties the OHRC to the ONLF is the same American Chronicle article cited above.

A lot of the footnotes need to be refactored; a more careful reading shows that at least one source is cited multiple times under slightly different titles. Sheesh, someone has been busy making tendentious edits. :-( llywrch (talk) 16:46, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Why include Ahmed Shriwa (American Suicide Bomber)[edit]

Why is there any mention of Ahmed Shirwa, the so-called American suicide bomber. This man had nothing to do with the ONLF and as a matter of fact it is reported that he was from the Majerteen clan of Somalia. He was not even Ogaden. Therefore he is completely irreleavent to any discussion re: the ONLF. What do ppl think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:47, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Pan Somali/Arab[edit]

This is in reference to this edit and User talk:CambridgeBayWeather#ONLF. The section, by my reading, does not say that the Ogaden people are Arab but that some people in the ONLF have tried to claim that they are an Arab movement in an effort to gain support. In particular it says that Admiral Mohamed Omar Osman, the ONLF chairman, has declared that they are. Look at the last sentence as it's now written "Around 99% of the Ogaden people practice Islam and some leaders of the Ogaden National Liberation Front." To me this now reads that although 99% of the Ogaden are Muslim only some of the leaders of the ONLF are. I think that the original section needs restoring. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 15:41, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know who in the ONLF claimed that this was an Arab movement, since it isn't. And the source needs to be validated.

The ONLF is a liberation front of the Somali people in the Ethiopian region. It is a struggle for the Somali people there, who happen to be also African, just like the Ethiopians. This has nothing to do with Arabs, and being a Muslim does not connect with being an Arab. As there are white Muslims, Black Muslims, etc.

It is and always will be a Somali movement and for the vision of a Greater Somalia. People of Ogaden do not even speak Arabic or conduct their meeting in that language. If you see clips and videos they are speaking in the beautiful Somali language. There is a point that I must stop wikipedia and their deeming Somalis to be connected with Arabs. First every single Somali name is translated to the Arabic language, now a Somali movement is being considered an Arab movement. It is like the systematic destruction of my people and I will no longer stand for it.

When Somalia joined the Arab league in 1974 it was because of resources, and not because we are Arabs. We are not and never will be. We are proud to be Somali. --FancyFaceU (talk) 00:10, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, the text in question did cite a source; see WP:V. I suppose it boils down to whether or not we consider the website to be a reliable source. Note that the website is cited elsewhere on Wikipedia. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 21:58, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not saying that the ONLF or the Ogaden people are Arabs. All it says is that some members of the ONLF say that. Is there another source that states the Ogaden people are not Arabs? If so then the article could say that Admiral Mohamed Omar Osman said that and another source to indicate that in reality the Ogaden people are not really. Enter CBW, waits for audience applause, not a sausage. 22:49, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Mkativerata (talk) 23:06, 17 January 2011 (UTC)