Talk:Tunisia/Archive 1

The Anthem: Ala Khallidi
The Second Anthem Ala Khallidi was abondoned when the President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali took power in 1987. This marvellous anthem was simply discarded because it contains praise to the old president Habib Bourguiba. It may be obvious that one country should have one single anthem but it should not be obvious to consider Ala Khallidi as simply non existant (as it is the case now in Tunisian media). I wonder if somebody could get the lyrics or even the music on a file and provide it to the Wikipedia, just to remember the childhood years when just before the 8 PM news edition we heard that anthem, while surrounded by our loved family. It is simply a piece of memory and certainly a cherished part of us. ---0:348, 12 DEC 2004 (UTC)--- R. B. Incertus.

Ala khallidi lyrics

reasons why this article is below standards
I suspect one of the largest reasons this article is currently sub-standard is the low level of access and also government-restricted access to the Internet in tunisia. Freedom of speech is a bit of a problem there, and internet access is quite limited. Sorry I don't have the details at my fingertips. Sbwoodside 03:03, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Tunisia
Hi the Coat of arms that you are using is the old one (before 1963 I think). Please see the french article to have the good one. Kassus 09:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

This has been updated to refelct the current (monochromatic background) arms. 18 Oct 2006


 * A request for an svg version of the new coat of arms was made at the image improvement page of the Wikipedia Graphics lab. I have uploaded the resulting file, but it needs attention from someone who knows Arabic:  I simply traced a low-resolution version of the motto, so although it is as good as the version on the previous picture, it is ugly and most likely incorrect. --Slashme (talk) 08:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Potential NPOV editing?
Sorry to barge in annonymously, but certain portions of this article don't really sound acceptably neutral for an encyclopedia. To whit;

"Most likely the Internet has only made public the pervasive structure of state control which has managed to shroud itself in a western friendly face, welcoming masses of tourists who can even enjoy topless beaches.

Tunisia is also noteworthy for the extensive male prostitution trade which focuses on the beaches westerns go for vacation. The government seems to treat male sex workers as non-criminals."

I know I might well get flamed for this, but this appears to be written by a non-English speaker and, in all certainty, a Tunisian. This seems blatantly NPOV, especially in the second quoted paragraph as it seems to suggest that male prostitutes are criminals by default. I'm too tired to edit to article, but could someone redress this balance please? Many regards, Keth (kethkinsey@googlemail.com)

Edit: Sorry, I meant a Tunisian critical to the current administration. Therefore, surely, NPOV? 172.188.140.52 02:52, 1 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I second that. This article is packed full of NPOV Cornell010


 * NPOV is good, POV is bad, BTW ;-)  62.31.116.126 19:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Official Language and Demographics
I have added to this section because as a tunisian I felt the information being presented was inaccurate and did not cite sources. A source that is often cited uses subjects that are not Tunisians nor from the region and therefore cannot be applied to this country as the region itself is immense. In tunisia, the 130,000 Berbers listed, are a distinct people apart, clearly apart from the majority of Arabs and sundry other races, such as Turkish or European or Jewish, so it is inconceivable for someone to write, "while most consider themselves arab" based on no evidence and obviously no experience. It is I think grotesque to rob a people a whole country of its identity, as surely they know more about their identity than outsiders. I have also corrected the section about the language, as an Arab Tunisia who speaks both fosha Arabic and the vernacular. It seems to me that whoever write the section had probably zero knowledge of Arabic and Arabic dialects, be it Tunisian, Syrian or Egyptian. I have provided some examples and plan to add many more. I have also added the fact that most Tunisians speak French, in some instances solely French. The country's francophone character must be well documented. I hope only tunisians or Scholars whose area this is add to the article and not scatterbrains. Mariam83 12:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering with which part of the statement "while most consider themselves arab" you disagree? You obviously don't mean that they don't! It's meant to communicate self identification, which is the main factor in ethnic identity, not to denigrate. Yidhhurli matefhemch qasdi. But reputable genetic studies show that Arab identity to come mainly from switching, not from invasion. In one of your earlier edits, you claimed that some Berbers adopted an Arab identity earlier: that's exactly what you deleted was trying to say. May be there's a better way to say it, but you haven't found it. Bouha 12:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

1. Arabic is the only official language of Tunisia. But French is used widely in trade and commerce. This has been corrected.

2. Whether of Arab, Bereber, or of mixed descent, the overwhelming majority of Tunisians consider themselves as ethnically and culturally Arab. In fact Tunisia was home to the Arab League Orginization for many years.


 * see my comment on the latter. Rather than deleting stuff, add, which is what I have done, rather than just reverting your edits. The identity is important, but the genetics is also interesting.

--Bouha 21:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Dear Bouha, you are absolutely right =) however, the source that is often cited on these pages is based on subjects that have nothing to do with Tunisia or even algeria. The subjects used in the national geographic study consist of about 100 subjects or more, from the mauritanian/southern moroccan region. In a region as enormous as the Southern Mediterranean/North Africa, we cannot be so careless as to apply findings from mauritania, which is demographically non-arab for the most part and dissimilar to the countries traditionally making up the Maghreb, to countries afar, near Malta and Italy, with different racial make up =) please research the sources you use or support before taking them as gospel and please do not forget that a spanish source most likely advances "orientalist" notions in conducting its studies, hence the "let us use mauritanians and some berbers from south morocco and apply the results to an area more than twice as large as europe and ignore the reality and disrespect the history and culture" I would love to discuss this with you , we could find sources together, perhaps French sources as they are more familiar with the region, and thank you for advising me because i am nto familiar with the rules entirely and wikipedia is so complex in intricate in that it is full of links. Thanks again. Mariam83 13:01, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

"In fact Tunisia was home to the Arab League Orginization for many years."

Membership to the Arab league is more a political status rather than a true reflection of one's culture and identity. Case in point, Egypt's membership was suspended between 79 and 89 for signing the peace treaty with Israel, does it mean Egypt was not an Arab country for a decade?

Bouha,

I totally agree with your last comment about the Arab League. I stand corrected.

As an Arab, I disagree. It is a reflection of a country's culture and identity. Admittedly with current political shifts and European meddling, two very non-Arab countries have been admitted into the Arab league, sudan and mauritania. Most Arabs consider this a dismal move on the part of Arab corrupt, incompetent leaders and find it almost laughable. Sudanis are not considered Arab by Arabs but black despite the fact that they have been admitted into the Arab league and despite the fact that the admission of these two non-arab countries makes bouha's defensive argument seem plausible when in fact it is an attempt to distort reality. The idea that an Arab race does not exist is absurd and a european creation to further divide Arabs. In fact, Arabs recognize each other instantly.

"The above pargraph is an absolute farce. I am an Arab and the overwhelming majority of Arabs consider the Sudanese and Mauritanians as Arabs (of course there are non-Arab minorities in Sudan and Mauritania). The only two non-Arab countries to be admitted to the Arab League are Djibouti and Somalia. The term Arab is not tied to a specific race or religion. It is your heritage and your identity. As long as you identify yourself as an Arab then you are an Arab. You can be black, white, brown, Jewish, Muslim, Christian - none of these things matter.

'It is difficult for people in the West to understand this since they are so used defining people either racially or religiously in the typical European prejudiced racial fashion that has been inherited from generation to generation."'

You are most certainly not an Arab if you think that anyone, regardless of race, can be Arab. The truth is this notion that Arab is not a race but a language stems from devious Western devilish divisive political tactics. Mauritanians and Sudanese may be "Arab" but the reality is that the idea that they are is laughable. Though there are some "Arabs" in these two countries, they stand out from the rest, who are not Arab but black, that is, black as in aswad as in sub-saharan zitoune as in non-Arab. It is tied to a specific heritage and race, and is tied to Islam though the tiny christian minority is trying to make it seem otherwise and as they contest from the West and with devious western tactics, they have managed to succeed on mediums such as this one, that is, unrealiable unsuccessful, inadequate mediums but in the Arab Muslim world they have not.No, not anyone is Arab. A black person is not Arab, not is a Jew, nor an Indian, nor a white that is european person lol..well, if this is the case they I am German as I have always rather liked German literature and am quite fluent in German, so yes, I am German :) this is the atttitude that has been imposed on the Arab world as a divisive tactic and Arabs, as they are ruled by corrupt scum and as they suffer and are victimized by this vicious corruption have accepted this notion passively and idiotically,..but the truth is, an Arab is an Arab, from the historical Arab world, that does NOT include mauritania or sudan.'' When I first read the article about Tunisia, I found it to be extremely biased. The article was, and still is, deliberately ignoring the Arab identity of Tunisia. I know that we are living in times when it’s easy to jump on the bandwagon of Arab bashing, but it’s absurd as to how the article skews such obvious facts.

The overwhelming majority of Tunisians identify themselves simply as Arabs. No doubt, that Tunisians are also proud of their Berber and Carthaginian roots.

I think we should keep our biases aside when we contribute to this website.

Anyhow, the article is definitely below standard.

Best Regards.


 * Actually, the comment about the Arab League was from someone else who didn't sign in. I don't think the article denies Tunisia's Arabic identity: may be this could be more strongly stated. But this is a fact of identity (and language), rather than genetics. (Similarly, the English do not perceive themselves as Celtic, but most of the genes in England are from before the Anglo-Saxon conquest: ethnically they are Germanic, genetically mainly Celtic). And to prove I'm not anti-Arab, look at the Arab world article where I reverted edits which removed North Africa from the Arab world! --Bouha 05:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

May I ask where you are from? I am originally Tunisian, and as an Arab, I find your insolence offensive and I am saddened by the fact that you are editing a profile about a country that you know nothing about. This is why wikipedia is worthless and will not last. ___ quote : "The overwhelming majority of Tunisians identify themselves simply as Arabs."

I totally agree! Every Tunisian I have known considers themselves simply as an Arab. Here we have one biased individual who can write whatever he/she wants. That is why Wikipedia is a complete failure and definitely cannot be relied upon when it comes to issues of religion, history, etc.

History: Punic vs. Phoenician
I'm a bit confused by this passage. This article seems to suggest that Punic & Phoenician are synonymous, but my limited research labels them as distinct (including in the wiki entry on Punic). Would someone more knowledgeable than I be able to clarify/rework? I'll watch it and do it myself in a while if no one else jumps in. JGray 09:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

My understanding is this. Carthage is called a Punic City, and thus a punic civilization because it was founded by the Phoenicians who settled the city after leaving Phoenicia (Modern-day Lebanon)

History: The Zirids
The passage on the Zirids does not mesh with the information and dates in the wikipedia article on the Zirids. Anyone able to amend? JGray 10:59, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Proposed WikiProject
In my ongoing efforts to try to include every country on the planet included in the scope of a WikiProject, I have proposed a new project on Tunisia at WikiProject Council/Proposals. Any interested parties are more than welcome to add their names there, so we can see if there is enough interest to start such a project. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 16:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Name
The official english UN name is Republic of Tunisia, although "Tunisian Republic" is a literal translation of the arabic name. Ybgursey 23:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

World War 2 Fluff
Are the hyperbole and constant references to really important battles (Poland, France, Stalingrad) necessary? We're talking about a minor battle, there was nothing decisive about Tunisia. Suez was not at stake, nor was the invasion of Italy particularly pressing or crucial to Russian victory in the East and D-Day in the West. --CJWilly 20:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Present Day Politics
"When his term is up, he will likely pass the title on to his homosexual son." whether who added the quoted part is anti-government or not, and whether the son is homosexual or not, this statement is not based on any verifiable fact and is ignoring that the transfer or power in a presidential government is done by means of elections and an already established procedure. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.203.40.202 (talk) 12:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC).

Unless you of course just keep pushing the elections on into the future. Let me give you an example.

"Legislation was today passed in the US to allow GW.Bush another 3 terms in office, and outlaws any political party besides the "republicans"." Then repeat that every 12 years. Seems that is whats being done in Tunisia and effectively it's a presidential dictatorship.

his son is like 3 or 4 years old, he can't be homosexual. but I am damn sure he will become one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.224.226.172 (talk) 03:13, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Any pronunciation information? I've always pronounced it "choo-ni-zi-ya" but I've just heard it pronounced as "t-nee-zya". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.243.129.138 (talk) 21:44, 26 April 2007 (UTC).


 * I'm assuming you're not American. tyoo-niz-i-ya (I'll do the IPA later) in the British pronunication, and too-neezh-a in American. What do people think: would having both pronunciations right at the beginning be too heavy? It's one of those words that Americans and Brits do not recognise when the other say it, especially as it's not that common in everyday speech. Drmaik 05:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Why not use the way that Tunisians pronounce the name? It's their country, after all. Gruffty 08:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * ie. too-nes.

Old flag??
I removed that one because there is no evidence that such a flag was in use. Animal representation was uncommon in the 14th century in muslim countries. In "Flags of the world" which deals with old flags of Tunisia, that flag does not exist!! Tunisino² 11:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism
There is someone playing around and inserting the sentence "Ownership of television sets in [country name] is 243 sets per 1000 households" in articles at random, including this article. Please check if the information is correct. — Adi Japan   ☎  04:23, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Changes
I have reverted the article to a version by Aaker. I am simply going to write what I wrote on another page, for I do not have the patience nor the time or inclination to explain, once again, why I have made the changes that I have made. I will simply remind everyone that in Tunisia, a country of 10 million people, there are only 130,000 Berbers in the country. The country's official language is Arabic, and the country does not recognize nor use the Berber language, because, unlike Morocco and to a lesser extent Algeria, Berbers make up a small percentage of the population. What is more, these Berbers, so called as this term is unacknowledged by the persons whom others presumptuously and lightheartedly label as such, have chosen to adopt the Arabic language as their own. It is therefore inappropriate, unencyclopedic and against all wikipedian pillars to fictionalize a country's official name. This is what I wrote to a certain "contributor" though I suspect his purpose is more to police than to contribute:


 * Thank you for proving my point exactly. Yes, the samples used were taken from the Western Saharan, which is not recognized as part of North Africa, and which is demographically a sub-saharan African country. Some samples were also taken from the Moroccan South, I mentioned this in my earlier comments. My major point was that the vast region that is North Africa, which again, let me reiterate, is more than twice as large as Europe, differs drastically from the sub-saharan region that this particular study focused on. While Morocco is a north Africa country, its southern region differs greatly from its northern region, as in the south there has been quite an inflow of sub-saharan Africans. What is more, Morocco does not in any way resemble its distant North African neighbors, most especially Algeria and Tunisia. This study did not use subjects from these two countries yet it applies its "findings", derived from a very paltry number of sub-saharan Africans/and a smaller number of Southern Moroccans, to the entire region. Even to a person such as yourself, it ought to be obvious to you that these findings are rather limited in scope. Most importantly however, the removal of any mention and subsequent denial of the region's Arab heritage is not in keeping with wikipedian pillars. The region is inextricably linked and defined by its Arab heritage and your insistence on denying this fact smacks of a general Anti-Arab bias. The fact is, the Berbers of the region are a people apart, quite distinct from the majority, and they do not account for the majority of the population. My sole concern is that articles be written in a neutral and objective manner, and that the sources one cites are properly researched. I am going to report you for Vandalism and for blindly adhering to your prejudices. However, I strongly urge you to analyze the issue that you seemingly know nothing about, rather than acting as a police force, as you are compromising the article's integrity. I hope you think before reverting articles whose subject matter you are unfamiliar with, and I hope you think about them in an impartial manner that reflects common sense, and not in a way that personalizes the impersonal, for I have absolutely no interest in you or any other contributors, I am merely trying to point out how incredibly flawed this article and others of its kind are, as they have obviously been hijacked by ignorant and rather uninformed non-natives and non-specialists, which frankly saddens me.

The changes that have been made use sources. The previous sources fall rather under the original category as they were not encyclopedic in nature and were privately funded. furthermore, the small scale and curious subjects of the study do not warrant the legitimacy that it has been granted. I think Columbia and the CIA are quite reliable sources. Mariam83 04:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Actually, I am a newcomer. It is only my third day, so I need some time to acquaint myself with the rules. I only learned to revert properly tonight. I didn't realize I was waging an "edit war" or doing anything drastic and for that I apologize. Certain contributors have been very welcoming such as Bouha, while others, like Lonewolf, have only attacked me in a contemptuous manner, which is not in keeping with Wikipedia's etiquette. I've been "bitten." I will try to learn more about how things work around here. Mariam83 05:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * You have been rude (which I personally don't mind if it's backed up by good editing), and have made bizarre accusations across the board from the start. Instead of making wild editing, including extensive copy/paste copyright violations, you need to start with clearly identified and marked discussions when you make large edits. Further, you're confusing personal opinion with fact (and opinion of in-region population contra standard English usage, e.g. - which may indeed be "wrong" but that's not your place to attack via an English language encyclo). Rather than whinging on about mistreatment, start calm discussions, and stop with the "I'm from the region ergo I know" schtick. The articles will never match your personal POV - they certainly don't match mine, and they certainly will always be 'imperfect.' Let me emphasize again I have reverted back to text that I don't even like or care for at all on the simple basis that your edits have been highly POV, not properly cited, made extensive copyright violations (copy/pasting direct text), and have not paid proper regard to allowing discussion with other editors, despite extensive blanking / edits and a veritable cri de couer on the part of other editors to slow down. I will also add that you have shown imperfect grasp of some issues in English. That's fine, not everyone can be fully fluent, it does mean again you should slow down. collounsbury 11:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC).

Edit War?
I am worried about the manner in which some articles relating to North Africa have been edited in a partisan, biased, and unobjective way. Let's analyze the issue. Khalidmn 18:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Really? Odd that you used exactly the same phrasing and style as the blocked user Mariam83. And making the same edits. Exactly the same in fact. collounsbury 18:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC).
 * Let me add that I am interested in understanding WHY you reverted the specific additions I made to your version, adding back in certain consensus material (again, not even my own writing). Specific point by point. collounsbury 18:17, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Purely accidental. Life is a series of contingencies, brother. Now, would you be so kind as to address my concerns? Khalidmn 18:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I very much doubt the similarities in phrasing, wording and same articles are "accidental." As for your concerns, I have no idea what they are. (collounsbury 18:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC))


 * You'll think me an awful wet blanket but, do you know? This is not the place to engage in personal attacks. Now, with regard to the issues you raised, two matters are of concern to me- 1)The article, as it stands, denies and downplays Tunisia's Arab identity, which renders its content nonsensical, in view of the official figures : 130,000 Berbers. Perhaps the contributors have overlooked this very important detail? This is symptomatic of a general denial of the region's immensity & complexity by some contributors. An instance of orientalism? Morocco is not Algeria and Algeria is not Egypt and Egypt is not Tunisia. In any case, such denials reflect personal preferences, not facts. 2)The source cited is unverifiable. I do not care if it was published by the NG. Sources must be verifiable. This one is not. The sources on the Berber page are, which is why I keep reverting the page. If you took the time to actually study those sources, you would not so insistently keep reverting the page. Until you adduce a source that is fully annotated, I think it best not to present conjecture as fact, especially where such sensitive issues are concerned. You should not edit articles to appease those who find the truth unsatisfactory. Let's adhere to accuracy. I will give you a few days to think about this. Best wishes Khalidmn 18:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * There are no personal attacks, merely my observation of suspicious phrasing and obsession. This aside, as you have finally cited actual issues:
 * (i) Downplaying "Arab" identity. I fail to see that. The article notes most Tunisians self-identify as Arabs, while descending in part or whole from other ethnicities. That is both accurate and not denying Arab identity. Language might be improvable.
 * (ii) I see nothing "orientalist" in the Berber connexion. The article writing in general is second rate English, but that has no "orientalist" angle.
 * (iii) The vague hand waving re denying
 * (iv) Citation re genetic heritage - odd this is precisely the same 'objection' as your first incarnation. The citation is certainly verifiable, although a better citation would be to the underlying scientific paper that presumably has been published by the cited authors. Regardless, the percentage input seems likely and reasonable. Your problem (again queerly replicating precisely Meriem83's phrasing and obsession) seems to be in desiring genetic heritage to = perfectly ethnic identity. There is no real reason for such a perfect correlation.
 * (v) The personal accusations replicate that of your prior incarnation. I can't respond to vague accusations, merely I stand by the consensus editing until better sourcing etc. are put forth (as well as clearer and more coherent argumentation).
 * collounsbury 19:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, you are imposing your personal preferences and opinions. What you think does not matter, as this is an encyclopedia, not your journal. Further, you are not an expert and you will not have the final word, despite your attempts, in conjunction with Bouha's, to exert absolute authority to further "personal preferences." The current version cites reputable sources- the CIA database and Columbia. If you go back and research the sources cited on the Berber page, you will recognize the discrepancy arises mainly from variation in sampling. The second experiement in particular is deemed "debatable" by the laughable author, simply because the findings do not coincide with the first experiment. If the contributors look into these sources however, it will become clear why the findings differ (different countries, different donors.) Please do not attempt to impose your extremist views on these pages, and try to maintain a civil tone. Khalidmn 20:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Discuss
Okay, we need to discuss our differences in detail. Agreed? Khalidmn 20:06, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Before you make up your mind, I want you to tell me about the two sources cited on the Berber page. 1)Tell me how many donors are used in the first experiment and where they originate from? 2)Tell me how many donors are used in the second exp, and where they originate from?

Now, tell me how large North AFrica is? Remind me again how large Algeria and Libya and Egypt are? Khalidmn 20:08, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Listen ... "Khalid" it is not the purpose of an encyclopedia to conduct "original research" nor analysis of sources / data. How many donors etc. is irrelevant as such.
 * Second, the size of North Africa is irrelevant to your objections, unless you make some precise, clear and specific comments on the relevance to Tunisia and the particular edits you are making.
 * Third, I also note the exact and precise identity between Mariam83's writing, edits and comments and yours.
 * Fourth, I am reverting to the prior edit I made (off of your edit, adding material) and warning again about the 3REV rule. I am quite willing to work through substantive, clear, concise and precise objections. However, POV personal djihads are another matter. (collounsbury 20:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC))

changes off 22 and 23 June
just to exaplain my reverts. The opening paragraph written by Mariam83 was not bad, just not as good as the old one. It read rather like a tourist brochure translated from French, with shorelines making abrupt southern turns and mountains traversing.. Some of the info could be included in geography, but I don't have the time right now. The much bigger problem is the deletion of sourced statements, one of which was initially suggested for inclusion by Mariam83, who seemed to have have misread it. But once I put it in, he removes it. Berber being spoken (to deny this shows he doesn't know very much about certain parts of Tunisia) is now referenced in Demographics of Tunisia. Bouha 04:31, 23 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Bouha, how very funny that you should refer to a "Mariam" as a male. I suppose this is symptomatic of your demonstrated failure thus far to grasp other simple facts and details. You need to source the Berber language addition. As far as I know, Berbers in Tunisia speak Tunisian Arabic or even a patois of several languages. Perhaps the Berbers that you are referring to are non-Tunisian new arrivals from alien lands. These people would not be considered Tunisians in Tunisia, but foreigners. As to the source I cited, again, you distorted it to estalish a direct link with sub-saharan africa when in the source it discusses the influence as compared to other North Africa countries, such as Algeria and Egypt, in which a very small amount is present to begin with. This is an instance of on your part an over-exuberance to include references to your native origins, and/or a failure to grasp simple facts and allusions. Furthermore, the opening paragraph does not in anyway read like a tourist brochure (you must be preparing to travel as you keep mentioning these) and in no way reads like transliterated French. You may be right however about the need to move it to the geography section. Unfortunately, pace wikipedians rather mediocre contributors, the opening paragraph was not better in anyway. In fact, it is, as I presume you reverted the article again, very poorly and unimaginatively written. Most importantly, the section that you "attempted" to rewrite is muddled, distorts the information, and again is very POV/afrocentrist. It also contradicts the official figures and sources. At this point, I am not sure that you or your fellow wikipedian buddies (the ones you've been colluding with on other pages to report me, block me, ban me etc. rather much too excitedly, which is quite revelatory, I guess I am a threat?) are capable of grasping even the simplest facts....I am not sure that I am willing to deal with people like you for very long either, though I will get others involved and persist for the sake of Tunisia, at least until this project sinks. No point really in forever editing an encylopedia written by amateurs when there are real accurate dependable unchanging encyclopedias available. However, for the sake of these people, I will never give up. Be humble, Bouha, and understand that you may not be the right person for this article..as of now, you're doing more harm than good. It is unacceptable and against the regulations and the essence of wikipedia to continually revert edits made by other users because they do not share your afrocentric vision of the world. Remember, this is no place for myth but fact. I intend to remain watchful of your continual reverts and your efforts to establish a dictatorial monopoly over these pages.  I feel that your mistaken belief that you own these articles is unacceptable, and should you revert again and again and again anything that expunges your afrocentrist views, and rightly so, I would edit it, as it is my right to do so, indeed, as I am encouraged to do so. I hope that we will be able to reach an agreement that is based on facts and not on your personal references. The sources must not be distorted. Mariam83 15:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

demographics
I'm putting the relevant paragraph hasre for discussion:


 * One study indicates that the majority of the genetic material in Tunisia did not arrive with the Arabs (no more than 20% was found to come from the Middle East). Here I deleted a comment about where other genetic material came from, as the study does not mention this and the reader can draw their own conclusions Another study, which does not compare Tunisian genetics with those of the Middle East, states that what it calls the Arab subhaplotype Va it's important to mention that the authors admit this haplotype is not actually an Arab marker, otherwise it is misleading, hence the comment re Middle East, unlike previous comment of was found at a relatively high frequency in Tunisia at 50.6%., but also states that this group in fact "probably correspond to a heterogeneous group representing various ethnicities", rather than just Arabs. Yet another finds that "the Tunisian genetic distances to European samples are smaller than those to North African groups" (these groups being from the Moroccan Atlas and the Siwa oasis in Egypt)Statement in parantheses clarifies which N. African pops. The quote does not mean that Tunisians are closer to Europeans than Algerians or Libyans, which is what it would suggest out of context. This suggests a significant European input to Tunisian genetics. Final sentence is less important, but states conclusion. I also deleted some of quote, as it went into detail (on immigration) mentioned elsewhere in the article

So, I do not accept that my changes make things 'murkier', but rather clearer.

Bouha 11:37, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

I am genuinely surprised that you have gone ahead and reverted, for the third time(and hence reached the limit under the 3RR) to the much poorer version. In order for me to specifically address the points that you bring up by posting snippets, you would have to post the articles in their entirety for me. Let me briefly explain the reasons why I feel the current version is a much poorer version.
 * Available online. Bouha 13:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

The article should discuss Tunisian demography in a historical context. In your rewrite, Tunisian history, in all its richness, is not given its due. You've replaced an informative, rich rendering of the findings with a poorly written, murky and I'm sorry to say, unsuccessful interpretation of the findings, out of context. In the prior version, it flows. In this current version, it seems out of place, mainly because what you have essentially done is attempted to reinterpret an already iterated interpretation. The difference is that in the newer version, the language is muddled, as are the facts (Arab gene not Arab? what?), and the wordage does not convey a sense of continuity, much less eloquence. I could go on and on but basically (!) Tunisian demography is not given adequate treatment. You expunged valuable and informative historical information and replaced it with facts that have less to do with Tunisian demographics in an encyclopedic context and more to do with Tunisia's neighbors with regard to the study cited (one of many), and still, you misinterpret the findings. My point is this: why not just let the prose speak for itself? in the older version, the source that you attempt to reinterpret speaks for itself, and does so in richer text. Thanks. Irrer 12:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Err, the article itelf says what I quoted, that what they call Arab is not necessarily Arab. Nothing vlauable expunged. Please, rather than making grandiose statements, claiming your writing is better than mine etc., reply to the specific comments I made. You have not answered any of them. Bouha 13:09, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Map...
...of the European Union? What? How about a map focusing on Tunisia. ¦ Reisio 23:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * this map is not of the EU, it is of Tunisia which is why Tunisia is encircled. The fact that Tunisia is in the heart of the Mediterranean and in close proximity to Europe is why Europe is also on the map. The map also contains a larger world map at the bottom, to situate its location on the globe. LGarrel 02:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

...you're completely right, that's what I think, what'bout an africa map? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Viktordb (talk • contribs) 01:42, August 27, 2007 (UTC)


 * Replaced EU map with the one showing Tunisia in green, everything else in gray. AlexiusHoratius 00:32, 20 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Reverted. Explanation above. LGarrel 02:09, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not going to fight over this, since I really don't care, but I don't see what was wrong with the old map, as it avoided all of the 'why is the EU highlighted' issues. AlexiusHoratius 00:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)


 * The edits are being made by a vandal - previously incarnated as Mariam83 who was permanently banned. (collounsbury 17:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC))

Units
These units are reported to be units formerly in use in Tunesia. Very little cross references are found. Please comment.

Units of length:

pic, pik (varies) (<1895) 	5.5E-1 [m]

pic, pik (Endezian) (<1895) 	6.73E-1 [m]

pic, pik (arabe)               4.93E-1 [m]

pic, pik (turki)               6.45E-1 [m]

pic, pik (andoulsi)            6.49E-1 [m]

Units of capacity:

saah (<1895) 				1/129	3.845E-3 [m³]  (3.8 liter)

kolla (?)              		1/50    9.92E-3   [m³]  (10 liter)

metter (?)            			1/25    1.984E-2  [m³]  (20 liter)

whiba (<1895) 				1/16	3.1E-2 	 [m³]  (31 liter)

millerole (<1895) 	 		4/31	6.4E-2    [m³]  (64 liter)

cafisso, cafiso (varies) (<1895)	1	4.96E-1  [m³]  (496 liter)

cafiz (cahiz, kafiz, kfiz) (varies) (<1889)	5.819E-1 [m³]  (581 liter)

Units of weight:

termino (Tunis, precious stones)			4.0E-4	 [kg]  (0.4 g)

uckir (once) (<1895)	    			1	3.1495E-2 [kg]  (31.5 g)

rottolo (attari) (<1895)			16	5.0392E-1 [kg] (0.5 kg)

rottolo (sucki) (<1895)				18	5.6691E-1 [kg] (0.57 kg)

rottolo (khaddari) (<1895)			20	6.299E-1 [kg]  (0.63 kg)

cantaro, cantar, kantar (attari) (<1895)	1600	5.0392E1 [kg]

cantaro, cantar, kantar (sucki) (<1895)		1800	5.6691E1 [kg]

cantaro, cantar, kantar (khaddari) (<1895)	2000	6.299E1  [kg]

endezian is not a therm known to me. Anyone?

khaddari, attari and sucki might be references to writers, towns or regions?

No units of area were found.

At2 12:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC)At2


 * khaddari would refer to the greengrocer, attari to the grocer, and sucki to the market: I guess there were different standards in different domains. rottolo should be rtal, which is still used today, but has been standardised to exactly 500g (rather like 'pfund' in Germany). Drmaik 19:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Motto
What is the motto on the coat of arms in Arabic script? --Slashme (talk) 13:59, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Here's a table with Arabic word, their respective pronunciation in Latin script and the meaning of the words in English (I hope this what you are looking for). If you are using Windows, may be you need to change the font or its size to see the script clearly.

Bestofmed (talk) 00:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Just what I needed. I have now updated the coat of arms. Please check whether it is now correct, and give suggestions on the style (as I don't speak Arabic, I can only make a guess at what the text should look like when written). --Slashme (talk) 07:10, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

First, I want to thank you for the SVG picture, not bad for someone who do not write Arabic (impressed me). I have downloaded the SVG file and did some modifications to correct some minor mistakes. But I think you need to check its artistic side; I am not an artist nor a vector graphics expert. The major modifications are: thank you for your work again. Bestofmed (talk) 10:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * you used عـ instead of حـ in Hurriya (the first letter)
 * The dots positions in the word Nidham (that was easy to correct :D)
 * Adala was perfect
 * Hey, glad to help. The mistake on the first letter of "Hurriya" was from looking at a very bad gif!  I was convinced that I had the letter back to front.  Thanks for that.  I have uploaded your fixed version over my original one. --Slashme (talk) 14:53, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

A propos des origines de la population tunisienne
1/dabord est ce que ces chercheurs ont preleve le dna de tous les 11 millions de tunisiens pour pouvoir donner une telle conclusion?

2/comment peut on savoir qu un type est du moyent orient par son dna?

3/quelle difference y a til dans le dna entre un arabe un amazigh un hebreux ou un europeen du sud etant donne que ces populations appartiennent tous a la sous race mediterranide(petite stature cheveux du noir jusuq au blond yeux du noir jusqu au plus clair cranes brachycepahles peau de differnts teins du blanc pilosite pas tres abondante largeur moyenne des epaules)?

4/comment savoir si un type est arabe par son dna s'il a par exemple un seul ancetre amazigh qui au cours de dizaines de generations s'est brasse avec des dizaines d'individus arabes? ou bien si dans ces ancetres existent des arabes des amazigh des pheniciens des proto-mediterraneens (les populations paleolithique de l'afrique du nord avant la migration des neolithiques amazigh puis les neolithiques arabes)? c'est a dire disons que un type a 20 milles ancetres(depuis l'apparition du premeir homo sapiens habilis qui avait la capacite de parler cad il y a quelques 80-100 milles ans de nos jours) dans ces ancetres l'ecrasante majorite on ne sait pas quelle langue ils parlaient l'infime reste est partage par exemple entre 100 arabes 23 arabophones 47 amaizgh 6 amazigh arabises 3 grecs turquises n X Yises quel est le critere pour etablir son origine linguistique ethnique nationale ou identitaire(ce sont des contextes differents)? aussi comment savoir "la langue ou l ethnie"de ces ancetres au dela de cette periode(cad depuis l apparition du premier homme homo sapiens sapiens erectus habilis il y a quelques 500 milles annees de la?

5/aussi quelle est la difference genetique entre les differentes populations semito-hamitiques (amazigh arabes egyptiens beja etc etc)pour pouvoir determiner qui est qui?

6/aussi quelle differnce genetique entre les differentes populations semitiques(arabes hebreux canaanites assyriens pheniciens)pour pouvoir dire qui est qui?

7/comment considerer les populations paleolithiques presentes en nord de l afrqiue avant l arrivee des migrations neolithiques des amazigh puis des arabes vu que ces populations se sont amazighises en liassant quelques mots dans les different dialectes amazigh d'apres l'article wikipedia sur les origines genetiques des amazigh

Y chromosomes are passed exclusively through the paternal line.

Bosch et al. (2001), found little genetic distinction between Arabic-speaking and Berber-speaking populations in North Africa, which they take to support the interpretation of the Arabization and Islamization of northwestern Africa, starting with word-borrowing during the 7th century A.D. and through State Arabic Language Officialisation post independence in 1962, as cultural phenomena without extensive genetic replacement. According to this study the historical origins of the NW African Y-chromosome pool may be summarized as follows: 75% NW African Upper Paleolithic (M78, M35, and M81), 13% Neolithic (J1-M267 and J2-M172), 4% historic European gene flow and 8% recent sub-Saharan African. They identify the "75% NW African Upper Paleolithic" component as "an Upper Paleolithic colonization that probably had its origin in Eastern Africa." The North-west African population's 75% Y chromosome genetic contribution from East Africa contrasted with a 78% contribution to the Iberian population from western Asia, suggests that the northern rim of the Mediterranean with the Strait of Gibraltar acted as a strong, albeit incomplete, barrier. However this study only analysed a small sample of Moroccan Y lineages.

on voit que 75%"sont des M78 M38 et M81"paleolithiques 13%sont des j1-m267 et des j2-m172"neolithiues et les autres europeens et sub sahariens (sans nous donner les haplogroupes de ces derniers ) alors ma question est qui sont les M78 les M35 les M81 les j1-M267 les j2-M172? et aussi si un male est m78 et sa femme est jem267 alors que seront leurs enfants? aussi comment savoir que les m78 sont paleolithiques et les j sont neolithiques et comment etaienet les haplogroupes de leurs ancetres avant d'entrer dans l ere paleolithique et l ere neolithique?

8/aussi on sait que les arabes ont vu le jour en ethiopie (d'apres wikipedia)alors comment savoir si il n y a pas des arabes venus d'afrique? et comment determiner les autres populations venues du moyent orient comme les hebreux les pheniciens les kurdes etc etc?

9/autre point disons que le type a un ancetre avec M78 alors si cet ancetre se mariera avec un type M35 ou des J quel haplogroupe dominerait ?

10/si le type a des ancetres J et parmi ces ancetres certains se sont croise avec des M alors est ce qu on trouvera toutes ces hybridations de J et de M  et de x ou y (s'il y a d'autres melanges autres que ces 2)ou bien quoi?

11/dans le meme article de wikipedia sur les amazigh

12/par les analyses genetiques il s avere que 75%des nord africains ont les fameuses haplogroupes M paleolithique et la on nous dit que la culture amazigh est une culture neolithique qui a vu le jour en periode neolithique alors soit les populations originelles paleolithiques ont ete afro-asiatiquophonise linguistiquement soit cette culture caspienne n'est pas afro-asiatique?

13/aussi comment savoir si la culture caspienne est une proto culture amazigh en l absence de vestiges d'ecriture ?

14/aussi on nous dit que cette culture est la continuation de la culture mesolithique ibero-maurusienne d'ou quelle est la nature ethnique et linguistique de cette culture?

15/dans ce passage du meme article

on nous dit que la majorite des tunsiens et algeriens sont issus de differentes migrations d'afro-asiatiques(amazigh puis berberes)venus du moyent orient or en plus haut ils donnent un taux de 75%d'individus de haplotype paleolithiques?

16/aussi on voit qu il y a des amazighophones et des arabophones de race negroide ma question est .est ce qu il est question des memes haplogroupes en question independamment de la race cad quoique on soit caucasoide ou negroides il est tjs question du meme haplogroupe?

17/finalement sachant que ethnie race identite origine et langue maternelle sont des concepts distincts sur quelle raisonnement s'est on base pour estimer que 2%de la population est berbere a defaut d'avoir realise un census general qui demanderait l'ethnie et l'identite de chaque tunisien un par un?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hanzukik (talk • contribs) 20:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

A propos du nombre des berberes en tunisie
Hanzukik (talk) 19:43, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

A moins d'un census general je conteste le chiffre sur le nombre des berberes Car il se peut qu'une personne connait un dialecte berbere mais se considere comme arabe et le contraire est valable vu que race (qui est la meme pour les arabes et les berberes cad la race mediterraneene sauf les touaregs negroides)identite ethnie langue maternelle et nation sont des concepts differnts et distinctes

Donc il faut faire un census general en tunisie et questionner "quelle est ton ethnie?" et pas "quelle est ta langue maternelle?"pour avoir le nombre correct des berberes en tunisie

Comment peut on avoir la moindre raison de penser que ces chiffres refletent un peu la realite?

Pour avoir des chiffres plus correctes on peut se fier au site le plus valable qu'est ethnologue.com ou on apprends sur la tunisie le suivant:

La tunisie:

http://www.ethnologue.com/show_country.asp?name=TN

Ethnologue.com nous donne 26milles chilhi que en prenant en compte les assimiles on peut donner un nombre de 10-15 milles de personnes connaissant un dialecte berbere et c'est fort probable car il n y a que les villages de matmata el qdima ,douiret,ouirsighen,sedouikech,guellala et tamazra ou il y a des personnes chlehaphones alors qu en ajim,taguermas et cheninni tous les chelhophones ont ete assimiles et il n'existe plus de berberes la bas.

Et bien sur ce chiffre de 10-15 milles de personnes connaissant un dialecte berbere ne signife pas automatiquement qu'ils se considerent comme berberes par ethnie cad qu'ils peuvent se considerer comme arabes ou autres car ethnie et langue maternelle sont des concepts distincts

Aussi vu que les dialectes berberes de tunisie sont des dialectes basiques minimalistes qui n'ont pas pu progresser et presque 60% de leur vocabulaire est arabe ,est ce qu'on peut penser a les classifier comme des pidgins arabo-berberes plutot que uniquement berberes.


 * please try to write in English as this is the English Wikipedia, thank you for your remarks. 138.48.213.186 (talk) 21:46, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Queen Elissa/Dido
On the history section it calls her Elissa, and links to a red page, but her wikipedia article calls her Dido, so do you mind if I switch her name and the link? TY in advance. DTPQueen 23:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Section about World War II
Ask anyone in Tunisia about Rommel or rest of the boring stories of WW-II, and you'll get a big "aaah ?" In fact, the section about World War II is completely irrelevant to the history of Tunisia. Tunisians were not involved in the conflict and there was no remarkable political impact. I agree it has to be mentioned, but briefly! that it! Someone take care of it ?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.153.211.101 (talk) 17:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Significant changes to article
I recently reverted a series of changes made to the article by User:5RyanK, as not only were they significantly more sympathetic in tone than the current prose but the editor appears to have taken the majority of the text in his other edits directly from the Tunisian tourist board website. much of the text was then restored by. I think this should be closely examined for copyvio and tone before being allowed to stand. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * There seems to be a clear bias of the tone of this article in favour of the Tunisian Government. There are many clearly known and documented human right violations in Tunisia. The Tunisian government has the one of the world most restricted policy for Internet access. Furthermore, there is no press freedom.
 * While writing a balanced article is always challenging, I would expect some fair coverage of many of the shortcomings of the Tunisian regime.
 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.155.176.180 (talk • contribs) 13:17, 31 July 2008


 * I've moved your comment into mine because they're related. This is a recent change to the article; have a look at the revision a few days ago and you'll see that the tone has changed significantly. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 13:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Need Arabic
Can someone add Arabic script at Qâlat Daqqa and Tabil? Badagnani (talk) 21:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Please help! Badagnani (talk) 18:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Head Scarf
What are the sources used for saying that the Tunisians encourage religious freedom? What about headscarves? Muslim women were banned from wearing it since the 1980s in public buildings. Someone ought to mention this. Sherif9282 (talk) 10:05, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Religion
If Christians make up about 560,000 then that would be more than 1%, in fact considering Tunisia's population is about 10 and a half million, that would mean 4 to 5%... someone needs to get the facts right!Domsta333 (talk) 02:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * 560,000 is not a valid figure, there is no source from what I know that supports this claim. According to the US State Department International Religious Freedom Report 2008, Christians numbers approximately 25,000. Bestofmed (talk) 16:25, 5 January 2009 (UTC).

move Religions section under Demographics
I suggest moving the Religions' section under Demographics. Waiting for your views, if there is no objections will proceed after few days.Bestofmed (talk) 16:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC).

reversion for copyright violations
I am sorry I had to revert this article back prior to the addition of material by a known copyright violator so that this article will not contain such material. Hmains (talk) 00:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Tunisian politics
The article is presenting Tunisia's policies as nearly perfect which we all know is not true!! It is very biased in my opinion! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.220.160.12 (talk) 23:37, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

National Anthem?
Someone please add the national anthem Humat Al Hima to the box. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.135.94.138 (talk) 19:38, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Anthem restored, thank you for pointing that out. Someone missed with the information box to remove some citations and as a result the anthem became invisible. Bestofmed (talk) 14:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC).

oh em effin gee.
I found this on the Tunisia web page. I assume it stands for "O M F_ _ ing G" or "Oh My F _ _ _ ing God." I don't know how to edit or remove it. Thanks Randall Borden —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.179.111 (talk) 09:14, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Government
Shouldn't the page on Tunisia talk about how its government is set up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Angmar09 (talk • contribs) 23:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

It was removed 05:17, 20 February 2009 due to vandalism. I just restored it, but didn't anyone notice? Guanxi (talk) 18:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

incredibly biased politics section!!
Please use cited remarks/experts opinions.Why on earth pro-islamist people own Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.215.28.213 (talk) 14:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

sorry but this article is to pro governamental, the policies of the goverment seem perfect and they are not at all, the tunisians I have meet in Tunisia haven't told me that and that isn't what I have seen in Tunisia, it looks more a dictatorship with democracy make up, I'm afraid that my english isn't good enough to colaborate in the making of this article

I don't know how it was earlier, but now "present politics" section is full with emotive language against the government (window-dressing, "political parties" in quotation marks etc.). I will just remove it now since it doesn't fulfil the wikipedia quality standards, but someone will have to put sonething neutral in its place eventually. 87.143.101.53 (talk) 18:02, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree. (Feb 27, 2010.) Much of this webpage is written not in the style of an encyclopedia entry, but in the style of a newspaper editorial. This page seems like it was written by a political activist, who is opposed to the current Tunisian government. Regardless of whether or not other readers agree with these claims, it is similar to having Rush Limbaugh write the Wikipedia entry on Barack Obama. It prevents Wikipedia from fulfilling its intended role as an online encyclopedia. And it does a disservice to the country and people of Tunisia in my opinion, regardless of what one may or may not think of their government. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.235.123.21 (talk) 22:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Ethnic Groups
Please it does not cancel the table!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.35.226.143 (talk) 19:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

www.tunisiareiser.com
mmmmmm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.227.0.97 (talk) 22:19, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Carthage?
For some reason the history of Carthage is not displayed here even so the Tunisia is the origin of Carthage, in fact the history of Carthage is instead displayed in the Lebanon article which makes little to no sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zymyne (talk • contribs) 21:18, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Over-Repetition
The current intro has "..country in Africa. It is an African country which was occupied by Arabs, Spanish and French. Tunisia is an African country and is bordered by Algeria to the west, .." As you can see there is an over repetition of the word African. I think it is obvious from the first sentence that Tunisia is an African nation and no need to flood the intro with the same information again and again. Bestofmed&trade; &lang; msg&crarr; &rang; 10:01, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Looking at the page history, it seems a user with the IP address 64.134.223.59 made these changes among others; they are nothing but vandalism. Bestofmed&trade; &lang; msg&crarr; &rang; 10:18, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Reliable sources
While I can appreciate some editors desire to document the appalling state of human rights in Tunisia, I would remind editors that blogs & editor taken photos do not qualify as WP:Reliable sources. All statements of this nature need to be supported by reliable sources such as Amnesty International reports or even Tunisian intellectuals writing in journals outside there country.

I can going to start removing the least reliable material and putting it here for further discussion. Ashmoo (talk) 09:19, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree, there is much that can be fairly written about these subjects, but it seems that editors with hearts in the right place more than sources in the right place have written very much that is far from NPOV and not very well sourced. I have done some work to clean these up and replace blogs with reliable sources. I will try to read anything that you post here. Aurasium (talk) 13:45, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm glad we agree Aurasium. My apologies, but I reverted your edits, as I believe they swing too far in the other direction. While you did remove much unsourced material, you also removed (or watered down) lots of text with good sources, especially sourced statements that were critical of the regime and added unsourced statements of your own. I tried to just fix the problems, but there were just too many.
 * I hope we can still work constructively together on this, but I suggest we edit slowly, so that all changes can be agreed upon. Ashmoo (talk) 10:15, 9 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, so much of what was there before (and is now there again) did not seem as if it was worth saving. It was not my intention to "water down" but to focus the article rather than being a grab bag of opinions. But why revert what I have written, when I have fixed obviously problematic issues? For one example, on my first change I added a citation that was previously marked as being missing. But you have rolled it back entirely. Can I propose you undo your roll-back and instead of starting from the previous version, let's start from what I had done and then add back what you believe is worth saving? What do you think? Aurasium (talk) 17:12, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I originally tried to go through and fix all the problems with the changes you had made, but realised there was too many and also didn't want to lose some of the good material from the original version that you had removed. I don't mean to sound harsh, many of your edits were good, but there were also many problems. The existing version (despite having problems) is the result of a long period of editing with consensus, so it is better to keep this version. Like I said, in the long term, it will be more stable if you slowly edit the existing version to improve it (either by chopping unsourced material, improving sources, or adding your own text) and allowing editors to approve it. Ashmoo (talk) 10:06, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Removed unsourced/POV text
I removed the following because 'rubber stamp' is obviously perjorative and unsourced. The 'sense of depression' sentence is very vague and only sourced by blogs. Ashmoo (talk) 10:18, 9 November 2010 (UTC) The rubber stamp parliament has repeatedly passed laws that make Tunisia appear democratic to outsiders. The result is a sense of depression among the thinking classes and Tunisians abroad.

I removed this whole paragraph, because, while it may well be true, is supported solely by photographs as evidence of his personality cult. Primary sources shouldn't be used, we need a secondary source who has compiled photographs such as these and decided that there is such a cult. Ashmoo (talk) 13:20, 15 November 2010 (UTC) There is a much encouraged and apparently organised personality cult. Daily newspapers run eulogistic articles praising the President, whose picture graces the first page on a daily basis, often alongside similar articles and pictures of his wife, Leila. Large pictures of President Ben Ali and 'spontaneously' erected banners praising him are found on all public buildings and major streets. The country's most recently built airport was also named after President Ben Ali.

Encyclopedia or Amnesty International anti-Tunisian Government page??
I understand that the Tunisian goverment has many flaws, but this page is just ridiculous. In the opening and the way to big (comparing to other parts) present day politics chapter it only focuses on critisizing the goverment. However there is virtually no tourist information, no information about food and drink (like is it a dry country) etc. Don't forget that this is an encyclopedia. It should help people find the information they need. And as Tunisia is a big tourist destination for Europeans this information should be present. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.205.38.221 (talk) 12:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

this is an encyclopedia, not a tourist guide. I daresay it is rathern more important to point out that the country has been run by a repressive dictatorship for 50 years than go on about cuisine and beaches. --dab (𒁳) 20:47, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Within the context of the islamic-arab world, the authoritarian Tunesian government was one of the most enlightened, liberal governments of all. I think the current Wiki article, in its concentration of critizing the Abidine government, completely misses that. Note also that the restriction on headscarfs and other expressions of political islam in public buildings is presented not as under "symbols of fundamentalist islam" but as "rights of muslims". Rights of muslims in a country where islam is the state religion?? Wth? Very misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derukugi (talk • contribs) 14:49, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

2010/2011 Protests Missing
Well, it seems there are large-scale riots now, so the world press will likely get off its ass and cover the situation in Tunisia, so we should get better sources to base this on. The problem seems to be that the journalists are so fascinated by the dictator of Libya next door that they are entirely uninterested in covering Tunisia. This article needs to be updated to cover the current civil unrest, and then it should be submitted to WP:ITN. --dab (𒁳) 20:53, 29 December 2010 (UTC) :It seems based on a lot of twitter comments that a LOT is happening (a coup as we speak?) but no media reports to verify this. Actually, there has been very little in regards to any of this by media as of late so take everything you hear on Twitter with a grain of salt. Calaka (talk) 05:23, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Do note that there is this: 2010–2011 Tunisian protests so any mention here would probably be minimal and instead require a link to that article. Calaka (talk) 05:29, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Just wanted to update that my coup statement above is false at the moment with this article recently being updated to refute the claim: . Although it still appears that riots are happening.Calaka (talk) 13:42, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I added a link and two sentences under politics but it didn't make it though the (government controlled?) admin of this page. Please some other admin has to add a link to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.205.40.171 (talk) 10:49, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * He says on the edit summary that he removed it due to it not having a reference. So add the sentence again but make sure you have an article that backs up what you said. He also said that it was placed in an incorrect spot but I am not sure where the sentence you wrote could be suitable in the article. I think it needs a mention here but not sure where the best place to be.Calaka (talk) 13:42, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I am glad we have 2010–2011 Tunisian protests. It appears the protests are escalating now. This article should be clearly linked from here. Also, I had to revert to 4 January because of the re-introduction of weasling. Is the Tunisian government editing this page or something? --dab (𒁳) 18:22, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * A lot of stuff is happening and I guess once things become a bit clearer there can be updates on this page. See the guardian live update page: Calaka (talk) 18:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Position in the Mediterranean See
There's no mention of closeness to strait of sicily, sicily, malta, sardegna, other sicilian islands in the "geography section", Tunisia's closeness to Europe it's geographically, politically, economically and culturally relevant (there are some references in the history though). Some parts of Tunisia are north of Sicily. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.17.207.151 (talk) 19:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

All-in-one map needed
An all-in-one map, showing the major internal features (cities, rivers, deserts, highways, railroads, salient political divisions, etc.) would be very helpful orienting those unfamiliar with the country. -- Beland (talk) 19:57, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from CKerr1, 15 January 2011
Please correct the improper English usage in the first sentence of the Economy section. The error is the incomplete "From...to" construct. A list of nouns beginning with "from" is expected to be completed by the "to"; otherwise the reader/listener is left hanging. "...from a and b and c and d..." is not meaningful. "...from a and b and c to d..." is correct. So please change the sentence "Tunisia has a diverse economy, ranging from agriculture, mining, manufacturing, petroleum products and tourism." to: "Tunisia has a diverse economy, ranging from agriculture, mining, manufacturing, and petroleum products, to tourism."

CKerr1 (talk) 08:16, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done Thank you for the correction. --Banana (talk) 19:12, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Szimnoch, 18 January 2011
Please change The Roman Period text from "149 BC until he area was was conquered " to "149 BC until the area was conquered"

Szimnoch (talk) 11:34, 18 January 2011 (UTC) ✅, good catch Chipmunkdavis (talk) 12:00, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Tourism
The economy section should give numbers for the importance of tourism. 7% of GDP and 370,000 jobs in 2009 are given in. The article Tourism in Tunisia gives "6.5% of Tunisia's GDP and provides 340,000 jobs of which 85,000 are direct jobs, or 11.5% of the working population", but no source; those numbers has been widely quoted in news (e.g ), but may originate from Wikipedia. 78.27.71.157 (talk) 07:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Done, thanks; I added just that; others might want to tweak it or whatever - but it is in there now. Cheers,  Chzz  ► 09:36, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

✅

Newspapers
I found a document at http://www.pm.gov.tn/pm/concours/getfile.php?id=322&type=pdf_programme_fr - But I'm not certain what it is WhisperToMe (talk) 23:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

A constitutional government - can you have a constitutional dictatorship - seems an oxymoron. The only mid-eastern country that allows a political opponent seems to be Iran, sort of. The vote was 70-30 but we all seem to forget that the CIA thought it would be more lopsided,say 75-25. The ruling party went out and won the old fashioned way - they bought the votes ( we call it earmarks). 159.105.80.220 (talk) 12:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

NPOV
The article, as it pertains to the government and politics of Tunisia, does not adhere to Wikipedia's policy of neutral presentation of information. One example is France, the former colonial power, lends support to the regime in exchange for economic and political subservience, -- this is probably overstated. Another example is referring to the leader as the authoritarian president -- it is fine to note that the regime may be authoritarian but the point does not have to be repeatedly addressed. Editors of this article should review Neutral point of view. W. B. Wilson (talk) 16:13, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The classification of the Tunisian government as authoritarian is well backed up with a diverse range of sources. If you are skeptical about specific facts then a simple inline fact request would be fair enough but I do not think that a blanket NPOV warning is justified.Dejvid (talk) 09:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * You are missing my point. If the government is authoritarian, then it is fine for that to be stated in Wikipedia.  It is not NPOV, however, to beat this point over and over in the article, or to make statements that imply Tunisia is basically a French colony in everything but name only ("subservience"). W. B. Wilson (talk) 16:41, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't agree it labors the point. When a country is authoritarian this will color all aspects of the countries politics.  It is not enough to simply mention this at the beginning and cover the elections as if they were fair and free.  It does not imply Tunisia is basically a French colony in everything but name - were Tunisa such it would probably have better human rights.  What is suggested is that the EU turns a blind eye to its internal politics because its foreign policy is to the EU liking.  If you have alternative views by all means include them if sourced.Dejvid (talk) 17:16, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not concerned with material being excluded, I am concerned with the wording of statements such as this one: France, the former colonial power, lends support to the regime in exchange for economic and political subservience, -- in particular, the word "subservience" is very strong and POV. Is Tunisia truly "obsequiously submissive", or has it simply aligned certain policies with those of France in order for certain economic and political gains? Could it not be changed to something less POV such as France, the former colonial power, lends support to the regime in exchange for which Tunisia in large part aligns its economic and foreign policies with those of France.? Again, stating facts about the nature of the elections is fine. But it is unnecessary to first state that Tunisia is authoritarian, and then later make a point of it having an authoritarian president -- doesn't "authoritarian government" imply that the senior state officials by definition operate in an authoritarian manner? For comparison, note how the Third Reich and Hitler are described in historical works.  While many take pains to identify the Third Reich as an authoritarian regime, no one feels it particularly necessary to state "the Reich's authoritarian Chancellor, Hitler" -- the fact that he was running an authoritarian regime makes it obvious he was a practitioner of authoritarian methods himself. W. B. Wilson (talk) 17:44, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * On some minor details you have a point and so I have made some minor changes but I still think a blanket POV warning is unwarranted.Dejvid (talk) 19:21, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Dejvid, the POV box has been removed. Thank you for your edits.  I have one more suggestion, on "The regime's rhetoric is paradoxical: the slogan of the President's party is "change" while the Presidency's person and policies have been the same for decades!". The suggested change would be to change the the "!" to a "."; also, "ironic" might be a better choice of words than "paradoxical", but those are indeed minor details. W. B. Wilson (talk) 05:04, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * May I suggest "contradictory" as an alternative? 98.155.93.161 (talk) 04:48, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

The page is extremely biased against the Tunisian government. It must be balanced in this regard. I am surprised to read such an article on Wikipedia. 92.44.12.217 (talk) 21:16, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think the NPOV failure goes both ways, some parts reading like an 'Invest in Tunisia' advertisement and much of the politics section seems to be spent trying to convince the reader how terrible the regime is, rather than just stating the facts and letting them speak for themselves. (Also blogs do not count as Reliable sources). Ashmoo (talk) 11:20, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

the article is in fact whitewashing the Tunisian government. "Has enjoyed overwhelming support in the 2009 elections"? Wth? If you rig the election to begin with you can "enjoy" any amount of support you like. We have excellent sources pointing out that Tunisia is a dictatorship. Only, these sources are stashed away in the "human rights" section, and the "Politics" section at the same time goes on about elections and bicameral parliament as if this was an actual democracy. This article isn't so much biased as schizophrenic. --dab (𒁳) 20:50, 29 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I've noticed that as a general failing of our "Politics of X" articles. I think the cause is not merely editing for propagandistic purposes, but also a narrow concern for constitutional minutiae without the context that determines their actual meaning.  Any article on a country's "politics" that does not give clearly the consensus external view of how political power is exercised is deeply flawed.  But these flaws are widespread; we have made a bureaucrat's obfuscatory delight.  Wareh (talk) 15:29, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

De-facto status of French?
In news reports about unrests in Tunis over the past weeks, I saw signs and banners in French but IIRC none in Arabic. According to the article, the public would speak Arabic and French would be used in education, press, and business. So, one would expect the signs to be in the colloquial language of the people, hence Arabic, not French. -- megA (talk) 16:03, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Many of the inhabitants of Tunis regularly vacation in France, have better education and often use French media and websites. This enables virtually all the adult people of Tunis to speak French fluently. The main reason why signs are in French in Tunisia is the same reason why signs are in English in Ireland - colonization and the inability to advance in the colonial society without learning the occupier's language. Similarly in Morocco and in some parts of Algeria, French is very well understood.--Smart30 (talk) 11:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Jasmine Revolution?
Been cruising around Tunisian info and blogs and it seems people in Tunisia resent the moniker Jasmine revolution; I think I read somewhere it was named so by western journalists, not Tunisians. Here is a comment I picked up this morning on Guardian: "It is not the Jasmine revolution. Please stop calling it as such.

the difference between these revolutions and other 'Colour' revolutions is that the colour revolution were incited and supported by the West.

the Revolutions we are seeing now were not supported by the west. In fact, they were met with caution and silence. we've had enough of the west claiming credit for all that's good that happens in the Middle East, and ignoring all responsibility of the bad." V.B. (talk) 03:56, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Dated Image
The image from the 2008 Press Freedom Index could be updated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.46.91 (talk) 06:56, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Interim Government
Wouldn't the current government be an interim government since Ben Ali was ousted? I think it should be changed to say interim government Mrld (talk) 02:02, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Berber name for Tunisia
keeps deleting the Berber name for Tunisia after being reverted (WP:BRD). I'd like to know what other editors think about this, note that Tunisia have native Berber speakers and has an extensive Berber history. Tachfin (talk) 20:01, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I think Berber legitimately deserves to be mentioned since, as you said, there are native speakers of Berbers in Tunisia. However I suggest you take a look at some other articles that had to deal with minority languages such as France, United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, China, India. Notice how a lot of them mention the name in other languages as an endnote. Taking these articles as precedents, since Berber has no official status and is only spoken by a small minority (as opposed to Morocco or Algeria), this could be a good compromise. With this method, we could also add French in the endnote as it is used extensively across the country for various reasons. On a side note, is anyone sure that Tunisian Berbers actually use the Tifinagh alphabet? Perhaps the Berber Latin or Berber Arabic alphabets could be more appropriate. — abjiklam (t &middot; &#32;c) 20:34, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, seems like a good compromise. Note that precedents are colored (Egypt for example). Tifinagh is officially adopted in Morocco and by the Tuaregs. In Algeria it's not officially adopted but it's often used in an official manner (Check this image ). The NTC of Libya also uses the script (You can see it in the background of official NTC press meetings). I think Berber activist might be using it in Tunisia as well but I'm not sure. Tachfin (talk) 20:50, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright then! Let's just see what other editors think and then we can make the changes. We can write something like:

The long name of Tunisia in other languages used in the country is:
 * ⵜⴰⴳⴷⵓⴷⴰ ⵏ ⵜⵓⵏⴻⵙ Tagduda n Tunes
 * République tunisienne
 * Sounds good? — abjiklam (t &middot; &#32;c) 21:23, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Thanks! Tachfin (talk) 21:32, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

As you know berber is nor official neither recognized language in Tunisia. Comparing with Morocco or Algeria articles is wrong. Even as mentionned above, using footnotes may not apply because in other cases (Italia, China, United Kingdom) those footnotes mention 'other languages have been officially recognised as legitimate autochthonous (regional) languages'. In the case of France which hasn't signed the UE Charter it is said 'The country's long name in its regional languages include: '. Probably footnote may apply but we have to use a right term such as 'non recognized minority language' --Helmoony (talk) 03:11, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm well aware Berber is not official. Notice that, in my proposal, nowhere is it written "official" or "recognized". I'm only referring to other languages which are in use inside the country. — ABJIKLAM (t &middot; &#32;c) 13:42, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It's OK for me. You can make changes. --Helmoony (talk) 16:46, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. — ABJIKLAM (t &middot; &#32;c) 23:12, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Unitary state ?
Tunisia as a unitary state is that not wrong with the first elections with multiple party's ?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.24.99.164 (talk) 00:57, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Unitary state only means that there is only a central government, as opposed to, say, a federation. — ABJIKLAM (t &middot; &#32;c) 01:18, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Politcal Parties of National Leaders
Doesn't everyone think that the President of Tunisia and Prime Minister of Tunisia (when he is sworn in) should have their party designation in parenthesis next to their name. Like, for example, in the United States infobox it says "President: Barack Obama (D)" and "Speaker of the House: John Boehner(R)". I think this is even more relevant now that Tunisia seems to be a real democracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fshoutofdawater (talk • contribs) 07:22, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Energy Sources
The graph on energy sources really doesn't tell you much. Those are processes that produce energy. Besides the green energy slice, none of them tell you anything about the source of all that steam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IRSpeshul (talk • contribs) 00:57, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Article is biased
This writer(s) go out of their way to minimize any sort of Arab identity for Tunisia. Ask the overwhelming majority of Tunisians and they will simply say that they are Arab and an integral part of the Arab World.


 * Hello Sir/Madam,
 * Please be aware that the concept of identity is more or less personal, Tunisia has certainly its Tunisian identity but attributing any supra-national identity is subject to debate. Many Tunisians consider themselves Arabs and many Tunisians do not consider themselves Arabs but Imazighen. The definition of an "Arab World" is still unclear, as many states where Arabic is an official language are not included in the "Arab World", e.g. Chad, and many states where Arabic is not spoken or spoken by minorities are considered to be a part of the "Arab World", e.g. Comoros and Somalia. Maltese is a language that is very close to Tunisian, which you could check yourself if you speak Tunisian by reading the article about Tunisia in Maltese here [], but it is not officially recognised as Arabic. Therefore such classification of "integral part of the "Arab World" is purely political and can be challenged, and I strongly disagree with your opinion.
 * Thank you and please sign your contributions.
 * Kind regards
 * E3 (talk) 14:56, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello Sir/Madam,

I agree with your comment about "Arab World" as being solely political and not appropriate in this contex. I retract it and thank you very much for the clarification.

I want to ask you why is it that so many articles, including this one about Tunisia some writers are bent on minimising the Arab identity or culture wherever it exists. I am still adamant that the overwhelming majority of Tunisians identify themselves simply as Muslim and Arab. I ask you to prove me otherwise. Simply go out into the street of any Tunisian town and canvass people's opinions if you do not agree with me. There is no doubt that the Imazighen influence is significant and played a pivitol role in shaping Tunisia.

By the way, please refer to the Tunisian constitution which indicates that Tunisia is part of the "Great Arab Maghreb". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.67.184 (talk) 18:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

As far as Maltese is concerned, it is considered part of the Arabic language and is the only language in the world that is a direct offshoot from Arabic. It originated with the Arabs who ruled neighbouring Scicily and not in Tunisia. I don't understand what Maltese has to do with your discussion.

I do understand the Tunisian dialect of Arabic.

Best regards,
 * Hello,
 * First, please make sure to always sign your contributions.
 * Concerning your question, you may want to address to all of those editing Wikipedia and the articles in question. You may view it as minimising, while others may view it as exposing a whole multi-cultural reality of Tunisia and North Africa. If you believe that "[you are] still adamant that the overwhelming majority of Tunisians identify themselves simply as Muslim and Arab", please provide well-referenced sources accordingly, as anyone could also provide the opposite.
 * On the other hand, Maltese is not the only language in the world that is "a direct offshot" from Arabic, you may refer to Juba-Arabic or Arabic-based creoles for example. Other authors, such as Thomas A. Leddy-Cecere for example, would disagree about your unreferenced hypothesis on the origin of Maltese. The reason why Maltese was mentioned, seemingly unclear for you, is that the concept of identity is entwined in your view with the language, while in the Maltese case, while the language is in fact related to Arabic, a Maltese would very unlikely consider herself or himself an Arab.
 * Regards.
 * E3 (talk) 14:56, 1 March 2014 (UTC)