Talk:International reactions to the Egyptian revolution of 2011

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

International reaction list format[edit]

[1][2] were de-bulleted without expmalantion as such. the reason it was bulleted was b/c some are not official/non-government reactions. which dont represent the view of the country officially.(Lihaas (talk) 13:02, 30 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Ok, that was me. I'd like to find a more attractive way of formatting multiple/long entries in that section. I also don't think the flag necessarily represents the government as opposed to the geographical/political area. Ocaasi (talk) 00:30, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
oh yeah, ive since corrected that. they should have gone now with the new subsection that collate all such related data.
right now it should represent the official view where the government in pwoer said so, for other members in government office but not in power (ie- in opposition) there is a double bullet (eg- israel)(Lihaas (talk) 00:39, 31 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
wo! just saw the over emphasis of stars and stripes. ghenerally on these typo of lists we put all official govt stuff in one to avoid duplication and confusing the matter.(Lihaas (talk) 00:42, 31 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
Hi Lihaas, I disagree with the 'only use bullet points for non official/governmental reactions' stance. Is there a particular reason for it? Readers will be able to tell who the reaction was from by reading the sentence, and the long paragraphs would be more readable if split up.--Physics is all gnomes (talk) 13:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
unfortunately, this logic of bullet hierarchy is not going to be clear and/or matter to the general reader.
  1. the flag use in general is basically decoration and adds little value to the general reader WP:FLAG
  2. the united states paragraph, unbulleted, is unreadable as it is a complete run-on paragraph.
  3. the prose needs to introduce the "official" (one in power) by that person's title/office. that makes clear it is "the government head" speaking and not another member of the government/country.
--71.167.157.12 (talk) 22:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weve generally been using this format in reaction lists. (how to differentiate that the israel reactions from non-government offiicals are now equal to government official statements in the usa.)Lihaas (talk) 12:07, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CIBC sabotaging Canadian reports[edit]

User_talk:199.198.223.106; someone or some people using computers belonging to CIBC is vadalizing the Americas section of this page. Requesting the article be locked down to prevent further vandalism. They have made repeated attempts to prevent specifically Canadian-related information from being posted on the site. A quick glance at their user history page will provide evidence of their tampering with other aritcles on Wikipedia.

Sixer Fixer (talk) 22:56, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI might be a good place to bring this. SilverserenC 23:10, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reaction[edit]

Supranational bodies[edit]

In the Reactions section we have responses grouped by region, but we have Europe and Supranational, of which the European Union is the only member so far. Can we just put the EU in the Europe section? Are there other supranational entities we couldn't group in their relevant regional categories? Ocaasi (talk) 18:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the UN has made a statement (we need to find it). expect the arab league to follow suit. then probably the IMF/World Bank, etc. even possibly the OIC(Lihaas (talk) 18:59, 29 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
Here's Moon's and Pillay's comments [3] -- Fuzheado | Talk 18:24, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
done.(Lihaas (talk) 18:59, 29 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
Europe & NATO (4. February)

i think, their opinions are important to add: EU & Munich Conference on Security Policy: NATO/Rasmussen & Guttenberg --Gsälzbär (talk) 21:26, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bahraini reaction[edit]

A GROUP of Egyptians in Bahrain joined their compatriots around the world in protesting against their own government yesterday evening.

The small band of demonstrators waved their nation's flag and taped their mouths shut during the silent protest outside the Egyptian Embassy, Zinj.

Opponents of the Egyptian government have been emboldened by the overthrow in Tunisia of former president Zine El Abidine Ben Ali.

"We're trying to show our support for the people in Egypt," one protestor told the GDN. "Across Egypt there were mass demonstrations against police brutality, poor living conditions, cases of government fraud and lack of honest democracy.

"We can also mention the case of Khaled Saeed, who was silenced after he produced a mobile recording as evidence of police station corruption."

He welcomed protests in countries around the world as well as across Egypt. "I think this is a very positive step in general because we have never before seen mass demonstrations of this scale in Egypt. It is a kind of awakening and people realise that they don't have to be afraid of police. I hope that government starts listening more closely to the people."

Police later confiscated the protesters' banners and asked them to move on, since they did not have permission to demonstrate.

Wider Middle East[edit]

Anymore reaction?? I know some have arrested Egyptian because they were trying organize protest to support the uprising in Egypt -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 20:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

id be interest to see tunisia (although WHO would say something i dont know) and algeria and lebanon. but i guess well wait a few days.(Lihaas (talk) 21:06, 29 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
I changed 'Wider Middle East' to just 'Middle East'. I think that's the common name, and I'm not sure 'wider' adds any meaningful distinction otherwise. Ocaasi (talk) 23:47, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly Middle East refers to Asia, but then you hae Libya.(Lihaas (talk) 08:06, 30 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Joint Statement[edit]

http://www.number10.gov.uk/latest-news/2011/01/joint-uk-france-germany-statement-on-egypt-59740, germany, france, and uk Ocaasi (talk) 03:06, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done with quopte.(Lihaas (talk) 08:35, 30 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Kuwait reaction[edit]

I copy-edited someone's international reaction addition about Kuwait:

Kuwait Emir Sabah Al-Ahmad Al-Jaber Al-Sabah condemned Saturday riots and affirmed Kuwait 's support to the Egyptian government and people. This came in a phone call Sheikh Sabah made with Mubarak to inquire about the developments in Egypt. Sheikh Sabah expressed to Mubarak the State of Kuwait's condemnation to all acts of "riots, looting and sabotage" as well as terrifying citizens, undermining security and stability of Egypt. Sheikh Sabah also said he was confident the "Egyptian brothers" would overcome this "critical" phase to reach security and stability.

...but there's no source for it. Ocaasi (talk) 12:05, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Google gives this one: [4]. Hope it helps. Kavas (talk) 01:01, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks. I'll add it if no one already has. Although it's a primary source, since it's from Kuwait's official website, I believe we can use it as a source for their own statements. Ocaasi (talk) 04:30, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Russian reaction[edit]

On http://www.mid.ru/brp_4.nsf/0/28DA98369E67F581C3257827005664EC there's a reaction from the Russian ministry. It's Russian but i translated it to know that it's about egypt, but I don't trust the translate enough to put it in here, if someone speaks Russian here than maybe he can put it in. Jillids (talk) 14:15, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

if you can give a rought overview, ill reword and put it on.(Lihaas (talk) 14:43, 30 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
I can't speak Russian. I have no problem to put it in but when I translate it than there could be vital words that are mistranslated. Jillids (talk) 14:49, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
could you try the russian embassy on wikipdia?(Lihaas (talk) 16:51, 30 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
No I haven't, I am not very active. Could you please ask them or give met the link? Jillids (talk) 17:52, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[5](Lihaas (talk) 18:14, 30 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
I have put a message at there talk page. Jillids (talk) 18:21, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have done a translation, based off of Google Translate, but edited using my knowledge of both English and Russian for consistency and grammar (while doing my best to keep true to the original tone and content). Feel free to verify this as needed.

MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

INFORMATION AND PRESS DEPARTMENT

119200, Moscow G-200, Smolenskaya Square Hay., 32/34 tel.: (499) 244-4119, fax: (499) 244-4112 e-mail: dip@mid.ru, web-address: www.mid.ru

PRESS RELEASE

Of the oral message from Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov to Foreign Minister of Egypt Ahmed Aboul Gheit

83-29-01-2011


January 29, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, Sergey Lavrov, has sent an oral message to the Foreign Minister of Egypt Ahmed Aboul Gheit, to read:

"With great attention and concern, we are following those events that have gripped Egypt. Our hearts go out to your friendly country and friendly Egyptian people in connection to the shocks they endured, which unfortunately led to human casualties and other losses. We very much hope that the phase of confrontation will be overcome with non-violent means, without de-stabilizing the situation in the country while on the path to reaching an agreement on how to move forward the process of further development in Egypt.

We sincerely hope that the Egyptian leadership and all of society will show high national responsibility and do everything necessary to stabilize the situation and to ensure a civil peace, which is so necessary for progress and for meeting people's aspirations.

I hope that the Egyptian side will take comprehensive measures to ensure the safety of Russian citizens located in Egypt.

I would also like to emphasize that the stability of Egypt meets the genuine interests of both the Egyptians and the entire Middle East region. We are also sincerely interested in this in Moscow. Of course, we remain fully committed to the strategic partnership that connects Russia and Egypt. We have no doubt that [Egypt's] constructive and energetic role in the international and regional arenas will continue."

January 29, 2011

END

Google Translate Original: http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mid.ru%2Fbrp_4.nsf%2F0%2F28DA98369E67F581C3257827005664EC&act=url

207.239.48.34 (talk) 21:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC) RK[reply]
PS, I am not affiliated with the Russian Embassy (Wikipedia or otherwise), nor am I affiliated with the Russian Federation government in any way. Then again, I am not in any way affiliated with Egypt either 207.239.48.34 (talk) 21:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC) RK[reply]
thx. feel free to change it on the reaction pag as you see fit.(Lihaas (talk) 22:00, 31 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
I've made some minor edits to the RU section of the reaction page based on this translation, substituting actual quotes for the older text RE: "affecting everyone" and RE: Russians in Egypt so that it's more specific. Might need a little more editing, though the gist of it is definitely there now.207.239.48.34 (talk) 22:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC) RK[reply]

american reaction[edit]

there are continous american relations that need to be noted. Surprised no ones mentioned blowback yet.(Lihaas (talk) 20:40, 31 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Chinese version of Twitter blocks search term "Egypt"[edit]

This is a pretty interesting news report. The Chinese Twitter-like websites, sina.com and sohu.com, have blocked searches for the keyword "Egypt", returning the search with the sentence "According to the laws in force, the results of your search cannot be given."

Maybe this can go in International reactions or somewhere? SilverserenC 23:20, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I read somewhere that this was untrue... will try to find it again. --Physics is all gnomes (talk) 23:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look some more and see what I can find. SilverserenC 23:40, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, can't find it now. From what I remember, it said a blogger contact in china had said that the claim wasn't true. I guess if there are multiple sources saying it is true then we could add it anyway.--Physics is all gnomes (talk) 23:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here's some more, New York Times, WTMA, Toronto Star. Good enough? SilverserenC 23:49, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is original research, but here's the real info for people who care. Yes, searching the Chinese characters for Egypt on Sohu or Sina's microblogging (aka Chinese twitter) service will give you no results. However, people can still write about it. If you search for the chiense characters for egypt on site:t.sohu.com on google, it'll give you over 6000 results. Also, the current statement on the page about news being restricted coverage on Egypt in state media is completely incorrect. Sure, they're not doing daily reporting on it and presenting it as a fight for freedom from dictatorship into rightful democracy like over here, but they are reporting on it. In addition, they don't appear to be scrubbing comments on it at all. I've no idea how Reuters determined this. If you go on some popular Chinese forums like Mop or Tieba, using Google translate, you can find a lot of discussion on the protests, some supporting it and some not (could be the 50 cent party or normal Chinese citizens, who knows?) but there is discussion. Of course this is meaningless because I'm not a professional journalist, but it just sickens me how I haven't seen a single journalist correctly report the level of censorship in China, instead choosing to sensationalize and distort.99.230.213.54 (talk) 16:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And I've got to say that all these journalists churning out the same distorted news in lockstep based on what Reuters said is kind of disturbing. It gives everyone the sense that we're receiving the correct and unbiased news. You'd expect differently because we have a free media.99.230.213.54 (talk) 16:14, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijani Diplomat killed; Causes fleeing of Azerbaijani citizens from Egypt[edit]

According to this, an Azerbaijani diplomat was killed on the 29th. SilverserenC 23:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's time to start routing these to the international reactions article. Ocaasi (talk) 23:37, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I know. It's just that this is the centralized discussion place. I don't want to have it be abandoned on the international reactions talk page. SilverserenC 23:40, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 23:50, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
already on that pege.(Lihaas (talk) 23:58, 31 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Non-governmental[edit]

In an Open Letter to President Obama, a large group of well-reputed American academics calls for the US leader to demand swift change in Egypt -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 11:46, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

with a source add to NGO i guess.Lihaas (talk) 11:25, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on long term improvement- more background[edit]

I reckon this article would be improved by giving more background to some of the statements. For example, the reactions from the US, Israel and the Palestinians are all based on the complex background of Egypt's history and foreign relations. But I'm not sure the best way to structure the article to achieve that. Any thoughts?--Physics is all gnomes (talk) 00:16, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hmm, tough. to avoid OR would need the sources too. but lets discuss wording here first.Lihaas (talk) 11:25, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Evacuation of Foriegn Citziens[edit]

There are reports coming out now that countries are now evacuating citizens from Egypt. Should this be put in the "International Reactions" section and article or is this already done? Sources: http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/01/31/egypt.evacuations/index.html http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110131/ap_on_re_eu/egypt_evacuations OpenInfoForAll (talk) 01:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's brief mention of it on this page, but the main section has been moved to the International Reactions article. Updates should go there. Thanks -- Ocaasi (talk) 01:20, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Frank_G._Wisner US Special Envoy to Egypt[edit]

Frank_G._Wisner has been selected as a special envoy to Egypt in regards to the recent uprisings against Hosni Mubarak[1].
LP-mn (talk) 02:23, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link--would someone please port this over to International reactions to the 2011 Egyptian protests? Ocaasi (talk) 02:32, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done (added under state dept)(Lihaas (talk) 16:48, 4 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2011/jan/31/egypt-protests-live-updates

Africa not mentioned[edit]

Hi! I would like to point out that a category for reactions from African countries is missing. Also, Libya has been put in the Middle-East category by mistake, it is a North-African country not Middle-Eastern. I am new to Wikipedia talk pages so I don't know how such edits are to be made but these seem important in order to keep the page accurate and relevant. Thank you! Lsamoa (talk) 12:22, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Libya is correctly categorized as "Middle East" per many concepts of the Greater Middle East (Middle East + Near East), which includes North Africa, the entire Arab League. In any case, since this article is part of a series on the protests in the Arab League, it is useful to categorize Libya in the same category as Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan; also (North) Sudan.
Africa is missing, it should be added for Sub-saharan non-Arab Africa
You will note that Asia also does not contain the Middle East countries, so why should Africa?
64.229.101.119 (talk) 14:50, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Libya is an Arab country, but which is located on the African continent. If one wants to group Arab countries in the same group (which could be a good idea), this can be surely be done with consensus to do so. --Russavia I'm chanting as we speak 16:59, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The heading here isn't Greater Middle East but Middle East only, which shouldn't include Libya. I agree that Libya should be grouped with Tunisia but the correct term for this grouping is North Africa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lsamoa (talk • contribs) 17:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei[edit]

"America's control over Egypt's leaders has ...... turned Egypt into the biggest enemy of Palestine and turned it into the greatest refuge for Zionists," some1 needs to add this -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 18:15, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 DoneLihaas (talk) 17:31, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The protesters reaction to the speech very funny. They told noway dude. Your country is not even a Democracy. did you forget about the 2009 Iranian presidential election. Here's the link It's in Arabic English link -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 20:19, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
re- Done though not nearly as much interference as from traditional benefactos of mubarak (Lihaas (talk) 15:10, 8 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

reaction list format[edit]

again, for the IP, the new format with the colon instead of asterisks by (i forget who) was a great idea. we went along with it to seperate different government reactions. But for Iran the Foreign Minister and Foreign Ministry are part of the same reaction, same department. Likewise for the USA's prez and white house fellow and for the state dept, sec'y of state and ambassador who are all part of the same dept,Lihaas (talk) 17:20, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

all fine and good. but paragraphs are bloated and, as such, unreadable. i'll not change again and leave them bloated for now; plent of other cleanup to address.--96.232.126.111 (talk) 17:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

context within prose is core[edit]

the current state of the article is severely lacking in context (who said what when (date); who IS (i.e., credentials) the person who said something; etc.). this is understandable given the rapidly changing news related to the article and the fluidity of the many edits.

however, Lihaas has removed some dates within the prose via this edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_reactions_to_the_2011_Egyptian_protests&diff=412231299&oldid=412224428 with an edit summary "this is not a timeline to date everything".

i find it hard to believe that an encyclopedic article would force the reader to delve into every citation to determine the context.--96.232.126.111 (talk) 22:43, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of arabic headlines[edit]

  • دعم عالمي لحق التظاهر بمصر --> Global support for the right to protest in Egypt
  • "العاهل السعودي يدعم مبارك ويدين "المندسين --> Saudi king shows his support for Mubarak, Condemns "the infiltrators"

Hope I helped -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 07:38, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - both appended --96.232.126.111 (talk) 17:03, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

translations needed[edit]

the arabic wikipedia has a maldivian and malaysian reaction. farsi also has some other supranational body that i cant tell what it is.Lihaas (talk) 04:56, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good article on regional pressure to move slowly[edit]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/09/world/middleeast/09diplomacy.html?src=me&ref=world Ocaasi (talk) 19:54, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]


scope of page[edit]

since the articelis already 100k+ before the overthrow and more rections ill follow hard and fast, suggest this page be used for pre11 Feb reactions where a section on the main page deals with post-overthrow reactions.Lihaas (talk) 14:12, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I think we should have several sections due to the massive amounts of International Reactions released during the revolution ... with the start of the protests, the eruption of violence and beating of journalists then after the resignation. Essam Sharaf 15:01, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
the violence and journalists is listed on the domestic response section.
i take it you then support the limited scope of this with another apect of the post-ouster reactions
ie- this is the reactions to the pre-revolution aspect.Lihaas (talk) 18:07, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. We should definitely start another article or section to outline the reactions after Mubarak's resignation. Essam Sharaf (talk) 09:30, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just wait a day until we figure out what the naming convention will be at the main article. Then we can align them. Ocaasi (talk) 17:56, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
agreed for now, though arent we enar unanimous therE?Lihaas (talk) 19:23, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Supranational bodies placing[edit]

Why is the supranational bodies section at the top? Surely the actual countries should come first, and supranational bodies only after that? Munci (talk) 14:22, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

its generally considered as such on these lists. because its a collation of MORE bodies and states, which is at least beleived to superceede the one state (as in the euu). a change would require a much broader consensus.(Lihaas (talk) 19:48, 14 February 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
It's not actually standard. At International reaction to the 2007 Pakistani state of emergency, International reactions to the 2006 North Korean nuclear test, International reaction to the United States presidential election, 2008, international recognition of Kosovo, International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia the positions of states comes before the positions of intergovernmental organisations. And at International reactions to the 2006 Lebanon War, the only intergovernmental organisation to come near the start is the UN. And at International reaction to the assassination of Anna Politkovskaya, it's alphabetical. Admittedly, at [Reactions to the 2010 Moscow Metro bombings]], International reaction to the 2009 Iranian presidential election, International reactions to the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy, [International reaction to the 2009 Honduran coup d'état]], International reaction to the 2008 Zimbabwean presidential election, International reaction to 2008 Tibetan unrest and International reaction to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the intergovernmental organisations are at the top but there's clearly not an established consensus one way or the other. And it should be countries coming first. Munci (talk) 17:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Neither is obviously correct. Let's focus on content first and fix this format later. It makes sense to have Middle East, then major world powers, then minor world powers, in that order, but where the Supranational bodies fit could be anywhere in that line-up. Ocaasi (talk) 17:58, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Although on one page (i believe the reactions tot he gaza flotill raid) we put the regional supranational bodies on the top of the regional with only the likes of the UN on the top)Lihaas (talk) 19:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Splitting[edit]

I think we need to split the page again into two other pages while keeping summary here. The page need to split into two pages; one dealing with International reactions before Mubarak stepped down and post-Mubarak. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 00:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Kosovo Reference[edit]

I put in a reference to the reaction of Kosovo to the situation and it was removed without explanation by another editor [6]. I suspect this was a POV edit and would like to know the justification for doing this. - Canadian Bobby (talk) 19:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo wasn't removed from the article, the part edit regarding Kosovo was moved to the "Evacuations and travel advisories" section. There was no reaction from the Kosovar Government regarding the revolution, apart from evacuating civilians. IJA (talk) 09:44, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I stand corrected! Canadian Bobby (talk) 19:09, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo note[edit]

Can you provide a link regarding the consensus about the Kosovo note? Majuru (talk) 20:28, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is located on the Kosovo note page. --WhiteWriter speaks 20:39, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't provide a link to the consensus, I will remove it. It takes up server memory. Majuru (talk) 10:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ohoho, you threaten me? :) :) :) C'mon man, dont attack. And it's not up to us to worry about server memory. The link is there. Just to let you know that note passed NPOV noticeboard, mediation, several POV deletion requests, and all other relevant wiki structures and guidelines, so questioned it existence would be quite a task. --WhiteWriter speaks 11:44, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag African Union.svg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Flag African Union.svg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:44, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on International reactions to the Egyptian Revolution of 2011. 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) 02:33, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International reactions to the Egyptian Revolution of 2011. 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) 06:27, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 30 external links on International reactions to the Egyptian Revolution of 2011. 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) 01:56, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on International reactions to the Egyptian revolution of 2011. 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) 11:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:International_reactions_to_the_Egyptian_revolution_of_2011&oldid=1207727280"