Talk:Tunisian revolution/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Background to the revolution

Ok, I am not an expert on this subject or Wikipedia so this might violate some rules. Please don't bite me. However, I think that the article fails to mention something.

Supposedly, the revolution happened because, basically, living conditions are poor and the government is corrupt, as mentioned in the intro of this aticle. However, after some research, I seriously doubt this.
On the corruption index, Tunisia ranked 59th [1] and has been there for the past few years. It is one of highest in Africa and quite high in the world.
On the HDI, Tunisia is third in Africa and is in the 'high' category[2].
And on other indexes, which I do not have time to find sources now, Tunisia ranked high both in the region and in the world.
Also, note that Tunisia was democratic, with the 'everybody-gets-a-vote', 'parliament' and 'multiparty' system and all that. So theoretically, people could just vote off the people they don't like, since this is the whole point of democracy, or does democracy not work?
It should be clear what point I am trying to make here. Why did the people demand revolution? They live a pretty good life and enjoy democracy, what else are they asking for?Zlqq2144 (talk) 21:41, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
No, Tunisia was not a democracy, they only pretended to be one by holding non-free "elections". See e.g. Freedom House [3], which rates Tunisia as a non-democracy with the lowest possible "political liberties" score of 7. Ben Ali was a typical dictator.
You seem to be right with respect to corruption and HDI, but I suppose Tunisians compare themselves not only to other African countries, but also to Europe (since Tunisia practically borders on Europe, and the country has many European tourists), where they would rank very low in both comparisons. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 15:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Ok, the government system is still up to debate. However, if you look at the corruption index, Tunisia is ranked 59th, better than some European countries (e.g. Italy) and IS in the high category. Sure, there's still room for improvement, but they are already one of the highest in the world, so why revolt when they can just change (i mean, whether Ben Ali was dictator or not, he is doing a pretty good job on corruption, according to the index).
And the HDI, they are not only one of the highest in Africa, they are in the high category and they are improving every year (up 17 places from 09 to 10). I mean, it IS a good job for an African country only getting independence in 1957. Zlqq2144 (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
I just want to add to this discussion, that the former Tunisian government was very good in producing nice looking statistics, and that international organisations took them with delight just as they were. A good book, for all those who happen to read French: Béatrice Hibou, "La force de l'obéissance: économie politique de la répression en Tunisie". It talks about economic mechanisms creating or reinforcing repression. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.5.226.26 (talk) 13:55, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Timeline

Last protests happened months ago, goals of revolution may not have been established yet (ie democratical elections) but that same applies to Velvet revolution or any revolution during 1989 which timeline ends with last protests. I suggest we finally put an end to the timeline, giving end date on January 27 and all related incidents shall be mentioned in Aftermath or other section. It´s established that Tunisian revolution had happened and is not happening now by all major media outlets. --EllsworthSK (talk) 00:14, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

"The people want to topple the regime."

I have heard many times that Tunisian's started the slogan “The people want to topple the regime.” For example in yesterdays NYTimes article (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/22/world/middleeast/22poet.html):

Tunisia can claim the slogan of the Arab revolts: “The people want to topple the regime.”

That seems like it's worth mention in this article, but I don't know enough to say where.

Cheers, — sligocki (talk) 19:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Transition (post Ben Ali) need a comprehensive article

We are now and for the last 6 months in the transitional phase, which is as important and complex as the revolution itself. A clear, comprehensive article on this transitional phase and its actors, problematics, dynamics, and moves is very need. Yug (talk) 21:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Updated Montage

When comparing this page to the Egyptian and (now) Libyan revolutions, I believe the opening image (currently one of the flag being flown on the 23rd Jan) needs a revamp with a montage of highlights of this revolution. Anyone kind/skilled enough to create one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.202.247.242 (talk) 22:35, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 2

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. No consensus to overturn previous discussion result. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


Tunisian revolution → Tunisian Revolution – I cannot see why the "Revolution" part should not be capitalized. Personally, I feel that the "bring it in line with Egyptian revolution and Libyan civil war, et al. are irrelevant because the title does not have a "2011" prefix like the aforementioned other two.

Either that, or we move it to 2011 Tunisian revolution. 48Lugur (talk) 03:11, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

  • Oppose – straightforward MOS:CAPS; sources don't mostly capitalize it Dicklyon (talk) 04:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
  • STRONG Support – This is how the article's name was originally formatted following the previous move and consensus, before somebody decided to change it virtually without discussion. Besides, it fits with all the naming conventions regarding similar revolutionary events, such as the Cuban or French Revolution. --24.107.235.192 (talk) 08:07, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

redirect hatnote

Two of us have removed this odd hatnote: ""Wikileaks Revolution" redirects here. For the site in general, see WikiLeaks." Is it plausible to anyone that a person looking for Wikileaks will instead find themselves here via Wikileaks Revolution? And shoudn't we include a paragraph about this term in the article if we're going to have a redirect by this name? Dicklyon (talk) 17:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested move 3

 – User:JCScaliger has been indef blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Pmanderson (blocked for another year for abusive sockpuppetry).
The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 15:25, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Tunisian Revolution → Tunisian revolution – Relisted. Jafeluv (talk) 22:37, 22 December 2011 (UTC) I know we just did this, and it closed as a move with two in favor and just me opposing, but I think it deserves to be looked at more closely. The reasoning "No consensus to overturn previous discussion result" is saying that it should not have been downcased because a previous RM discussion had upcased it; but that previous discussion had little or nothing to do with case; case was not discussed until afterward. So let's look at the case issue itself, instead of treating it as settled. The arguments for capitalization are specious, contrary to MOS:CAPS, and not supported by sources. Take a look at the news stories on the topic. Do they capitalize it? No. Do the cited sources capitalize it? No. Is "Tunisian Revolution", or even "Tunisian revolution", the accepted term for what we're talking about? Not really. It's an OK descriptive term, but is seldom or never treated as a proper noun. So we shouldn't either. Maybe in a few years... But for now, can we get more than a couple of people to evaluate the situation objectively please? Dicklyon (talk) 06:15, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Oppose. It may well be that we will want some other term; but not this proposed one. There have been many revolts and revolutions in Tunisia; until last year, the Tunisian Revolution meant what happened in the 1950s. The title "Tunisian revolution" would mean all of them - just as the French Revolution means 1789 but "French revolution" runs from the Jacquerie to de Gaulle - a useful article, which could be written; but not this article. JCScaliger (talk) 22:25, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I see that you are right; this book and these books. The RM 1 above succeeded on the false assertion that nothing else had been called a Tunisian revolution. So probably the right move is back to 2010–2011 Tunisian revolution, or Tunisian revolution 2010–2011 or something like that. You have a preference? Dicklyon (talk) 03:01, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. I don't see anyone else capitalizing it. Here is BBC. If someone wants to write an article on the various revolutions of Tunisian history, the title is obvious: Tunisian revolutions. Kauffner (talk) 09:10, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. The RSs tend to call it “Tunisian revolution” or describe the phenomenon like “Tunisia’s Jasmine Revolution”. There are other indicators that the term is not treated as a proper noun by the RSs any more than the 1992 LA riots is treated like a stand-alone proper noun. Greg L (talk) 02:48, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Support (ps, I think the previous post was by User:Greg L) {Yup; now fixed Greg L (talk) 02:26, 24 December 2011 (UTC)}. JCScaliger, I don't follow: why would a reader know by the caps that it refers to one of "many" revolutions in Tunisia? Upper or lower case, it doesn't change the recognisability, does it? Tony (talk) 08:21, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. It's not a name, is it? Paved with good intentions (talk) 23:57, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Needs to update time

According to headlines, the Tunisian revolution had been one in 2011 and has stopped. This article really has to update, otherwise, 30 years from now, people will look at this page and say, "It's still going on?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maggnotta (talk • contribs) 22:56, 20 April 2011 (UTC) good point.there has been no new protests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plijygrdwa (talk • contribs) 06:00, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Tunisian Revolution > Tunisian revolution

I've changed the article title from Tunisian Revolution to Tunisian revolution so that it tallies with 2011 Egyptian revolution and 2011 Libyan civil war. It seemed silly for this to remain Revolution, and the sources we use to support the naming all use the word in lower-case. Ericoides (talk) 15:47, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Take a look at French Revolution; that conforms to naming conventions for uprisings and revolutions. -- 92.4.107.56 (talk) 18:32, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
I think it should be capitalized, personally, but conventions may be more standardized in future. -Kudzu1 (talk) 02:48, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Libyan Civil War and Egyptian Revolution should be capitalized as well. It looks unprofessional to not capitalize. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.172.228.7 (talk) 19:38, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
It really doesn't matter one whit if you think it "looks unprofessional". We go by what the majority of reliable sources use. ~~ Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 19:31, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Does anyone else think this belongs in the external links?

The internet archive has a nice collection of Tunisian blogs and videos during the revolution. http://archive-it.org/collections/2323

Does anyone else think this belongs in the external links section? I wanted to check with others before adding it myself. :)

--24.113.3.173 (talk) 02:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Issue: The "policewoman" who slapped Mohamed Bouazizi was not a policewoman.

She was interviewed by blogger and independent journalist Michael Totten: http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blogs/michael-j-totten

In it, she self-identifies as a government worker, not a law enforcement officer. Quote: "My job was to chase away illegal fruit vendors. I don’t carry a gun. I don’t have a truncheon. I don’t carry a weapon at all." She also disputes many details of the current narrative, including the charge that she slapped the man.

I post this topic to see if anyone knows of anymore details about that woman (Faida Hamdi), her specific job, and the details of the actual initiating event. The details in Ms. Hamdi's interview are at odds with the narrative as it's currently been published in the news and in this article as well. I'd just go ahead and correct the identification of her as a police officer myself based on that article alone, but I don't know what to replace it with ("Government Official"? "Health Inspector"? "City Food Cart Vending Official"?), and I'm reluctant to change the details as posted in the live article without confirmation beyond Mr. Totten's column. It's a compelling interview, but it *IS* merely one, single source. Anyway, I'm posting this to see if anyone has anything else to add, and hopefully knows more than I do so that any update made would be accurate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldctjoc (talk • contribs) 14:43, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 11:43, 25 February 2011 (UTC)


2010–2011 Tunisian revolution → Tunisian Revolution — Suggesting move per User:Neutrality in the section above this. Under Wikipedia:Article titles, it is stated that article titles should "be precise, but only as precise as necessary." As there do not appear to have not been any other defined revolutions in Tunisian history, the proposed title would seem appropriate. The move is supported by the sources quoted in this article and would correspond with most other revolution articles on Wikipedia (such as French Revolution, Iranian Revolution, Cuban Revolution etc.)-The Celestial City (talk) 19:43, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

  • Support as there was no other Tunisian Revolution. GoodDay (talk) 22:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment the path to Tunisian independence appears to indicate a protacted low-level conflict of many years before the French withdrew, so this can be constructed as a revolution. 64.229.100.61 (talk) 22:20, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps, but I've never heard it referred to as such. With some exceptions, most wars of independence are not usually termed revolutions – see Mexican War of Independence and the separate Mexican Revolution; Argentine War of Independence and the separate Argentine Revolution; Cuban War of Independence and the separate Cuban Revolution. It is relatively unusual to refer to the 1948 Arab–Israeli War as the "Israeli Revolution", or the Mau Mau Uprising as the "Kenyan Revolution", or the Wars of Italian Independence as the "Italian Revolution". The Celestial City (talk) 15:31, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support this as Celestial City noted above. Neutralitytalk 15:49, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. There were coups in Tunisia previously, but not revolutions. Twilightchill t 10:32, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support. Completely agree. There are many places on Wikipedia where the "year" designation is totally unecessary. Colipon+(Talk) 05:19, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support per COMMONNAME and common sense. Why editors feel the need to pin the year to the front of every article about an event is a mystery to me. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 13:08, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Support, seems to have been move-protected under the wrong name - this was the title that came out of the previous discussion as well.--Kotniski (talk) 08:09, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Capitalisation

Apologies, I did not notice the proposed change in capitalisation when performing this RM, and moved to Tunisian revolution (etc) when the consensus above was Tunisian Revolution. Thanks to those who have fixed this. Andrewa (talk) 20:47, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

There are also wikipedia policies made through longer consensus and discussions that this that already mandate certain naming conventions Wikipedia:MOS#Article_titles.2C_headings.2C_and_sections and Wikipedia:Article_titles. The dte and the capitalisation is what matters not a heat-of-the-moment discussion.Lihaas (talk) 01:26, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Not quite sure what your point is here. Do you think the current name Tunisian Revolution is wrong? If so, why exactly? There's no obvious problem in terms of the links you gave above. What do you mean by heat-of-the-moment discussion? It seemed a very reasonable and constructive discussion to me. Andrewa (talk) 01:56, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
I didn't notice this before either - in fact I think it ought to have a small "r", since it's far too early to conclude that the description of this event has become a proper name in English.--Kotniski (talk) 12:08, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
As the Tunisian Revolution refers to a unique occurance (unlike, for example, "Tunisian protests" which is more general), the capatalisation as a proper noun would seem to be correct. The Celestial City (talk) 13:20, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Not necessarily; there are many unique events (even iconic ones) that I don't think would normally be capitalized in English: the assassination of JFK, the first moon landing, the September 11 attacks...--Kotniski (talk) 13:31, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Good points. I was merely addressing the issues of process; The consensus as expressed at the time of closing was clearly in favour of the capitalisation, perhaps in hindsight because many of us didn't even notice it. I think this may be a borderline case, and tend to the small r but I'm not altogether sure why. The fact that at least two competent pedants (I was ten years an auditor and so have some claim to cred in two different areas of professional pedantry) missed it seems to indicate that it's not all that important. Andrewa (talk) 18:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
In this case, if you are referring to the revolution in Tunisia by a title, i.e. (The) Tunisian Revolution, capitalization is correct. However, if you are referring to a 'revolution in Tunisia' or [The] 2010-2011 Tunisian revolution', it is lowercase. If we are content with naming the event the Tunisian Revolution, then it can stay as it is. In the same light, Category:2010–2011 Tunisian Revolution is incorrectly capitalized, because that is not a proper noun. The name is implying it is a revolution in Tunisia in 2010-2011, not the Tunisian Revolution by name. — Moe ε 22:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
I think a capital R is more appropriate, considering most Revolution articles in Wikipedia use it anyway (American Revolution, Argentine Revolution, Belgian Revolution, Cuban Revolution, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Iranian Revolution, Mexican Revolution, Monegasque Revolution, Philippine Revolution, Romanian Revolution, Russian Revolution, Serbian Revolution, Spanish Revolution, ect.). Charles Essie (talk) 15:31, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Dubious WikiLeaks influence

The citation for the supposed influence of WikiLeaks on the uprising is exceedingly dubious. From their 'About' page: "Strike The Root is a daily journal of current events and commentary from a libertarian/market anarchist perspective. The mission of STR is to advance the cause of liberty, primarily by de-mystifying and de-legitimizing the State. STR seeks a world where people are free to live their lives as they see fit, as long as they don't use force or fraud against peaceful people." Omehegan (talk) 18:43, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 4

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. No oppose votes (after one was withdrawn) and several supports, with valid reasons, after full listing period. (non-admin closure)  — Amakuru (talk) 14:32, 15 November 2013 (UTC)


Tunisian revolution → Tunisian Revolution – Almost all "Revolution" articles feature a capital "R" (American Revolution, Argentine Revolution, Belgian Revolution, Cuban Revolution, French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, Iranian Revolution, Mexican Revolution, Monegasque Revolution, Philippine Revolution, Romanian Revolution, Russian Revolution, Serbian Revolution, Spanish Revolution, ect. Charles Essie (talk) 02:52, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

  • Support This describes a particular historical event, not all revolutions that took place in Tunisia or were of a Tunisian character. --BDD (talk) 19:07, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. The article is about one specific event in Tunisia's history, not a general phenomenon of revolution in Tunisia. —  AjaxSmack  00:00, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment (vote edited from Oppose). When deciding these issues our criteria should be 1. rules, 2. sources, 3. conventions (in that order). Alright, so MOS:CAPS tells us "Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization. Most capitalization is for proper names or for acronyms". So we know that we capitalize if most RS's consider the full title a proper name. If it is split or unclear, tie goes to the uncapitalized form. 2. Sources. To assess this I looked at top 40 hits for "Tunisian Revolution" in google scholar: of the source I could see 26 did not capitalize 8 did capitalize. So, the rule says don't capitalize unnecessarily, the sources tend to not capitalize, so now we turn to conventions. 3. The convention of Arab Spring events (certainly a better place to look than the Belgian Revolution) tends to not capitalize: Egyptian Revolution of 2011, 2013 Egyptian coup d'état, Libyan civil war, Yemeni revolution, Bahraini uprising (2011–present), Syrian civil war, 2010–12 Algerian protests, etc. Most of these pages have had this conversation and decided for lower-case. That means that this move generally is against the Manual of Style, the sources, and the conventions. Note: If there was a discussion on renaming all Arab spring events (or all Arab spring events except the protests), I would vote to capitalize. But piecemeal adjustments based on consistency with irrelevant world events doesn't seem the best way to figure this out. AbstractIllusions (talk) 13:40, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
    • I would definitely support a move discussion on most Arab Spring articles (personaly I think Libyan civil war should be Libyan Civil War and Syrian civil war should be Syrian Civil War) for the same reasons as I have discussed here, most "Revolution" and "Civil War" pages are capitalized and it seems silly that the Arab Spring pages should be an exception. Charles Essie (talk) 18:39, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
AbstractIllusions, you're citing the exceptions. The great majority of members of the subcats of Category:Civil wars use title-case capitalization, which is appropriate for proper nouns like specific historical events. Using sentence-case capitalization just because newspapers are talking about "civil war in Syria" rather than "the Syrian Civil War" gets into the specialist style fallacy. --BDD (talk) 18:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
I think BDD is generally right here. I'm just a little more agnostic about what a proper noun is (if Middle East Monitor, The Africa Report, Al-Ahram, and the U.S. State Department--to take only the top Google News hits in a search for "Tunisian Revolution"--don't treat it as a proper noun, I'll go with that. Of the 26 Google News hits I get, none of which use the "revolution in Tunisia" form, 21 do not capitalize revolution, 4 do, and 1 uses 'Tunisia's revolution'). My oppose vote is a friendly oppose--I prefer the move but want to settle the issue and get most 'Revolutions' and 'Civil Wars' on the same style through broad understanding. I just want to have a more prominent conversation, maybe at WP:NCCAPS or something. If I'm the only oppose vote, closing admin should of course see that as a more general consensus and close with the move. AbstractIllusions (talk) 00:01, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
I think my oppose vote was a little too pointy in its objectives. Sources don't capitalize it seems. And I'm wary of some of the arguments in their farthest manifestation--but that's no reason to hold back a move that makes the most sense. Vote changed to a comment and that comment can be summarized thus: Ad-hoc fixing of pages is good, developing a rule that can help avoid these issues in the future is better. We should be able to reach consensus to capitalize most Revolutions, right? Maybe not. AbstractIllusions (talk) 03:28, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Who coined Jasmine Revolution?

The article gives credit to the term Jasmine Revolution to a French blogger in January 2011, but they weren't the first person to use it regarding Tunisia, or even prior revolutions.

For better or worse, I began using the phrase on Twitter on December 28 when I began my coverage of the Tunisian revolution for NPR. The phrase "jasmine revolution" and "jasmine revolt" were used by me and other media sources between December 28 and the date credited to the blogger. For example, this article I wrote for NPR on January 13. I wouldn't be surprised if others came up with the term independently, but it was definitely in use by me and other journalists as early as December 28, 2010.

Also, versions of the term had been used several years earlier in Pakistan, also created independently by Pakistanis.

Acarvin (talk) 16:35, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Since no one else made the edit, I've gone ahead and made it myself, including the appropriate citations. Acarvin (talk) 15:26, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Links

>> Tunisia's second revolution >> Some Tunisians still waiting for revolution>> Revealing Tunisia's corruption under Ben Ali (Lihaas (talk) 15:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)).

@Lihaas: Is there anything new? OccultZone (Talk) 16:26, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

this is wrong

too many errors in this article. Vietcong nuturlizer (talk) 00:54, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Could you please be more specific? Naming them will help us to fix the article. Even just pointing out a single error would help with this. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 9 Adar 5775 01:05, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:06, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 9 external links on Tunisian Revolution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:58, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Tunisian Revolution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:44, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Needs to be capitalized

The term is official. There is to put it in lower case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:CB:8001:28EB:155C:A39A:F0CD:B06A (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tunisian_revolution/Archive_2&oldid=1222931934"