Talk:History of Somalia (1991–2006)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good articleHistory of Somalia (1991–2006) was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 13, 2008Good article nomineeListed
March 8, 2015Good article reassessmentDelisted
Current status: Delisted good article

October 2014, article still gives undue weight to "positive" aspects[edit]

As of October 2014, this article seriously gives undue weight to "positive" aspects. According to the head of a Libertarian think tank, the situation has improves, because according to a set of criteria designed by a Libertarian think tank and their assessment of it, Somalia now scores higher than before. The article goes on to discuss those in detail. As discussed earlier on the talk page, the article talks by comparison very little about all the problems Somalia is facing. The fact that a very large part of Somalis still live abroad, that most of the country is unsafe, and that, at the latest measurement, it had the 4th lowest HDI in the world, are not or not much discussed. This article needs serious improvement and is certainly not a "Good article". --Gerrit CUTEDH 18:51, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few factual errors above. First, the fact that a country has a large diaspora is not necessarily an indication of its well-being. There are, for example, many more Lebanese in Brazil than in Lebanon itself. Somalia's diaspora is nowhere near as large; neither proportionately nor in absolute terms. Second, the Islamist insurgency was going on in the southern part of the country; the north, then as now, was largely peaceful (the insurgency is btw almost over after the launch in August of Operation Indian Ocean). Third, the social indicators during the period are indeed mentioned on the page. However, the Human Development Index isn't because Somalia was at the time not ranked. Fourth, this page was on the period when there was no permanent central government. However, there indeed were interim government strutures in the country starting in 2000; namely, the Transitional National Government (2000-2004) and the Transitional Federal Government (2004-2012). Lastly, this page was promoted to good article status, so clearly it does have many merits. Middayexpress (talk) 19:14, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When 7-8% of the entire population are officially classed as refugees, a diaspora is very good indication of its well-being. And, as you correctly point out, interim government structures and a functioning government and judiciary in semi-autonomous Somaliland existed, and yet the article places undue weight on commentary suggesting Somalia represented well-functioning anarchy. I'm unable to fathom how the article was ever classed as a "good article"; even if your viewpoint is quite close to those anarcho-capitalists whose analysis dominates it's still inappropriately structured, uneven, and badly-written, but it has changed significantly since that promotion, so I think it's reasonable to ask for it to be reassessedDtellett (talk) 15:01, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why this page focuses on statelessness is because it used to be called Anarchy in Somalia. This was the period in southern Somalia immediately before the advent of the Islamist insurgency. At any rate, refugee status is transient (not permanent) and voluntary (not involuntary); it disappears the minute a claimant receives his or her legal papers. I also didn't mention Somaliland, nor was that northwestern region of Somalia the only part of the country that was not affected by the southern insurgency during the period at hand. The northeastern Puntland region largely wasn't either. Together, that was indeed the majority of the country. Middayexpress (talk) 19:34, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Reassessment[edit]

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:History of Somalia (1991–2006)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was: delisted. AHeneen (talk) 04:58, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For readability, please place any comments or questions pertaining to this reassessment in the "Discussion" section rather than within the body of the review.

Scope[edit]

I'll take the liberty of impersonating Captain Obvious and point out that the article's title is "History of Somalia (1991–2006)". While there's some decent content concerning various aspects of society & the situation in Somalia, there is one glaringly obvious omission: any chronology of events during this time!! To understand what is missing from this article, see Somali Civil War#Timeline and read until the section "USC/SSA (1995–2000)" (the following section jumps forward to 2006-2009). Again this article is about the history of Somalia between 1991-2006.

Main aspects[edit]

There's no mention of the UN mission along with related humanitarian and military missions in Somalia during this time period. This is a significant aspect of the country's history during the period (Fails WP:GAC 3a). A sizeable chronology of events during this time period must be included in this article for it to be at GA status.

NPOV[edit]

I see that this article was previously "Anarchy in Somalia", but the scope of most articles is defined by the title. Per WP:PRECISION: "titles should be precise enough to unambiguously define the topical scope of the article". The title clearly indicates this article is about the history of Somalia during that period. Furthermore, it is clear that the prose of this article reflects the former title/scope. However, for many sections that means that the content is not written in a neutral point-of-view. Specifically, it gives undue weight to minority viewpoints: several sections focus on positive aspects of the lack of a central government rather than providing a balanced evaluation of the situation, for example:

  • Transport: largely written from a viewpoint that highlights the success of private airlines, rather than provide an overview of transport in Somalia during this time
  • Education: "For centuries, the Somali community, as opposed to the state, has been in charge of Islamic education in all aspects, providing financial and administrative support" (that is true of many parts of the world, where local religious organizations have been in charge of education); "in cases where there are state-supported public schools, private schools are often coveted for their academic excellence, outperforming their public competitors in academic achievement tests." (in most of the world, private schools perform better than public schools); the last paragraph is phrased to make the underlying fact seem more impressive: that 2 of 8 tertiary schools were founded during the lawless period
  • Islamic courts: This section neglects to adequately note that the Islamic Courts Union (probably the better title for this section) was not just a judicial system, but also a militia faction in the conflict. Non-judgemental terms should be used in this section. The section treats ICU like a legitimate government ("the sharia-based judicial institutions"), while referring to others as "secular rebel leaders" (they were secular, but "militia" is more appropriate than "rebel") and noting that Ethiopian intervention was backed by the UN, AU, & US (ICU was supported by foreign money from various Islamist organizations). The mention of the CIA funding is not very relevant here. "This was cited by experts as a factor in the resurgence of Islamic militias in the country, prompting the latter to engage in pre-emptive strikes which routed the rebel leaders." A factor is not the same as a significant factor and considering the length of this section is not relevant. What would be relevant to mention here is how the governed, imposed sharia law, and how the territory they controlled waxed and waned. "The ICU was later overthrown by the Ethiopian military with the support of the United Nations, African Union, and the United States government. After the ICU forces were chased from Mogadishu, the leaders of the Transitional Federal Parliament entered Somalia declaring themselves the rightful governors of Somalia." What's to say that the ICU were "rightful governors"?

Regarding balance, the article quotes articles (just to pick a couple examples) from the reliable New York Times and Economist that paint a positive picture of the economic situation, but those articles are balanced when noting the risks involved.

  • The New York Times referred to post-state Mogadishu as "the ultimate example of deregulation," noting that "[g]utsy entrepreneurs, including some women, opened their own hospitals, schools… telephone companies, power plants and ports."
But the article also balances this view in the following paragraph: "But doing business in anarchy has its drawbacks, like having to pay off a different pack of thugs every block or two. Ismail Goni, who owns an import-export business in Mogadishu, said that each time a shipment arrived, he had to hire dozens of his own gunmen to guard the cargo. "And we still lost 10 percent," he said."
  • The Economist argued the lack of telecommunication regulation in Somalia represented "a vivid illustration of the way in which governments…can often be more of a hindrance than a help" to private entrepreneurs.
But the second half of the last paragraph of the Economist article concludes: "But the risks are also high. Investment is all up front. There is no insurance available. And then there is Somalia itself. From a distance it looks like a free-market nirvana after The Economist's heart; but closer up it better resembles an armed oligarchy, capable of taking anything it wants at the point of a gun—even a Nokia handset." (so it's definitely inappropriate to say "The Economist argued...")

I don't have the time to examine every source, but I feel certain many other quotes have been used to include statements into this article that may match the source, but have been taken out of context to present a positive picture.

Unsourced content and reliable sources[edit]

There is a fair amount of unsourced content. There are also sources that come from biased sources; while such sources can be used on WP, it is important to consider what they are supporting. Given all the other significant issues with this article, I don't feel like taking time to examine sources to check this.

MOS and prose[edit]

The lead does not follow the guidelines in WP:Lead. It has content that does not appear elsewhere in the article and does not adequately summarize the article's content. There is one instance of "Powell et al. (2006)" (in the "Rule of Law" section); the citation style must be consistent in the article.

Additionally, one of the GA criteria is that "Well written: the prose is clear and concise". This article uses an excessive amount of quotes and names the source in the prose. A limited amount of this is ok, when necessary. However, in many places a source named in the prose combined with a quote is not appropriate (that's what the citation footnote is for!). Examples:

  • According to the CIA World Factbook, private telephone companies "offer service in most major cities" via wireless technology, charging "the lowest international rates on the continent"
Should be: "Private telephone companies provide service in most major cities and charge the lowest international rates on the continent.
  • The CIA World Factbook counsels that "Statistics on Somalia's GDP, growth, per capita income, and inflation should be viewed skeptically",[3] while estimating Somalia's GDP per capita at $600.
Probably better as: "Although the difficult to assess, Somalia's per capita GDP was estimated to be $600 in [year]" Note: the current factbook has 2008, 2009, & 2010 estimates but earlier years are relevant to the article. There is no longer a statement that "Statistics on Somalia's GDP, growth, per capita income, and inflation should be viewed skeptically" It's also worth pointing out that this ranked Somalia 226 of 228 (third from bottom) and I'm reasonably sure that low ranking hasn't changed much in the past two decades.
  • Additionally, "adult literacy is estimated to have declined from the already low level of 24% in 1989 to 17.1% in 2001." (no in-prose attrbution, but I don't see why this needs to be a quote)
  • Political loyalties are based on clan and region rather than political party, which, according to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs makes the sustainability of a centralised political system "difficult".
Could simply be stated as "Political loyalties are based on clan and region rather than political party, making the sustainability of a centralised political system difficult.

Overquoting is covered by WP:QUOTEFARM, specifically:

  • "Using too many quotes is incompatible with the encyclopedic writing style."
  • "Quotes shouldn't replace plain, concise text. Intersperse quotations with original prose that comments on those quotations instead of constructing articles out of quotations with little or no original prose."

Other notes[edit]

Other notes (which don't fit into the GA criteria as a reason to demote the article, they're just comments about issues that need to be fixed):

  • The "Islamic courts" section is probably best handled as a WP:Summary style overview of the ICU, including how the gained and lost territory.
  • The "Transitional Federal Government" is outdated
  • I suggest that section on the governance of Somalia be created, with subsections for the ICU, TFG, and info about the preceding Transitional National Government.
  • This list is incomplete because there are enough problems with the article & I don't feel like spending more time critiquing it

The former article name may explain why the article is written like it is, but is not an excuse for the article to be in an NPOV manner or not focused on the article's topic. This article clearly does not meet the Good Article criteria. I will give it the usual 7 days for comments before closing. AHeneen (talk) 07:41, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

For readability, please place any comments or questions pertaining to this reassessment below rather than within the body of the review.

  • Comment: Though this was briefly noted above, I would like to reemphasize that the page was originally titled "Anarchy in Somalia". It was renamed after a formal move discussion [1]. Consequently, the page's content largely reflects and fairly closely adheres to this original scope/theme of political and socioeconomic structures under statelessness. Middayexpress (talk) 14:49, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think this article should be delisted and not be considered a Good Article. The summary above is impressively exhaustive. What struck me in particular when I first came across this article a while ago, is that it reads like propaganda for anarcho-capitalism — that's why I put the NPOV tag on it. --Gerrit CUTEDH 22:48, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that this article should be delisted and not considered a Good Article, though ironically it's probably a better article now than when it was originally listed as a Good Article; it doesn't match the new title as closely but it's also not quite as hideously skewed towards a fringe POV,Dtellett (talk) 10:42, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on History of Somalia (1991–2006). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 12:25, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of Somalia (1991–2006). 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 07:57, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of Somalia (1991–2006). 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:01, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchist Somalia listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Anarchist Somalia. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  01:10, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_Somalia_(1991–2006)&oldid=1223149126"