Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:51, 22 June 2007

MiddleEastNewsAgency

there's also a newsagency called mena. see: mena.org.eg

Doesn't really have anything to do with the term MENA covered here. Egyptian state organ. (Collounsbury 08:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)).

Poorly written

This article was really terribly written. I have edited to rephrase to remove references of MENA region as if it is an "actor" - as well as excessive territorial precision as usage is fairly variable. I removed odd commentary on MENA as consumer market which sounds like promo marketing material (and strikes me as having needed citation to support). I also removed the extensive, POV, dated and inaccurate economic/marketing/consumer discussion (Collounsbury 08:41, 5 February 2006 (UTC)).

Inclusion of Western Sahara

Why, Jalil? As the article explicitly states, there is no one definition of MENA, but the guideline is the "Middle East" and "North Africa." Since Western Sahara is in North Africa, it belongs on the list, right? Are you going to delete - for instance - Djibouti, because it does not fit the criteria you cited (by way of Fayssal's edit summary)? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 03:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Western Sahara is in North Africa, and so is Kabylia and the Souss region. This list includes the countries not the provinces and territories. If you want to add Western Sahara, why not add Kabylia, Souss, the Rif, etc. Jibouti is a full-fledged country and is claimed/disputed by none, not to be compared with disputed territories.--A Jalil 07:00, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Justin, please stop that. You are being watched by not only admins but by arbits as well. So stop that nonsense. Why not go work for the World Bank and ask them to do include it in their definition? -- FayssalF - 10:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Nonsense? To call Western Sahara a province is POV, Jalil. You must know that. How is this nonsense, Fayssal? The article explicitly states that there is no single definition of MENA; Western Sahara is in North Africa, right? Is that nonsense? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 16:04, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

And to add a flag or whatever to it is POV as well. This is the bottom line. Please have some research and understand that MENA is an economic platform where state members often meet. It is not a political or geographic entity. So the nonsense i am referring to is just like trying to convience us to add Switzerland to the European Union. So please save us some time. Do you have any more confusions? -- FayssalF - 16:56, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

One definition Sure, that's one definition, Fayssal. So, are you going to delete Djibouti from the list, since it's not a part of the World Bank's definition? If not, why are you in favor of deleting Western Sahara? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 17:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Justin, please check your facts. Djibouti is listed at the WB list. -- FayssalF - 17:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

True I had assumed competency in the map that clearly is not the case... Djibouti is on their list, and for some reason, Malta is conspicuously absent from this one. Note that the section does not say "the following are the World Bank's definition of MENA," rather it says "MENA is typically used to include the following countries, although no standard definition exists." (emphasis added) How can you exclude Western Sahara? What is the justification, exactly? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 18:00, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah bloody hell, the little WS moujahil moudjahid is back. Malta is not part of MENA as (i) it is an EU member and second, despite having historic links to MENA, a long (willing) dependency of European powers (long as in centuries). MENA is a usage found largely in the sphere of people in WB circles and investment circles. WB usage, as such, then, rather than political activist circles is the reference point. Above all when such activists lack a basic understanding of usage, history or, well, practical reality. Welcome back to your personal Qixotic djihad mate. collounsbury 23:35, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks As usual, between British slang, obscure Arabic transliteration, and insults, I'm not sure that I even understand the point of your post. Are you in favor of removing Malta and/or including Western Sahara in this list? Thanks for the red link - here's another common courtesy and intelligibility. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 23:55, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Collounsbury for remarking Malta. Koavf has added it though MENA does not include European countries. Ceuta and Melilla are in North Africa and are at the moment part of Spain, if that does not make Spain part of MENA, how could Malta be??.--A Jalil 08:13, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know Ask the World Bank. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

koavf, you wrote above "As the article explicitly states, there is no one definition of MENA, but the guideline is the "Middle East" and "North Africa."". So why do you insist on inserting a European country, Malta?. Because it is on the list of countries on the WB page? but why do you try to add WS which is not on that list?, and it is not even a country. The WB seems to be relevant in the case of Malta but not in the case of WS. Stop this non-sense please.--A Jalil 20:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

World Bank definitions I was never in favor of the World Bank definition, but if we're going to use it, we should use it, and not capriciously delete one of the countries. You can't exclude both Malta and Western Sahara by any rational standard. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 02:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Good lord, what the bloody hell is your bloody problem? Malta is by no rational standard part of the MENA region. No one in business or generally includes it in the game. Why WB has it on their headline list escapes me, but certainly if you go to the bloody drop down menu you don't bloody get Malta, now do you? (The answer is no) Western Sahara is a disputed bloody territory, different question. I'm bloody taking Malta off the page. Some degree of rationality may yet prevail. collounsbury 14:03, 17 June 2007 (UTC).

By the way, for a look at real operational definiations of MENA, see WB's own "Doing Business" Database / Project: MENA for example http://www.doingbusiness.org/EconomyRankings/?regionid=426 - Malta does not operationally fall in there. Indeed, in business we look at Malta - like Cyprus - as part of Europe. Now lay off your peculiar little djihad. It's tediously ill-informed. collounsbury 14:10, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

This is getting ridiculous. Before bloody reverting, bloody well respond to actual critiques. I defend your (koavf) edits where you have a point, but bloody playing childish revert games tries the patience. 20:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Bloody Well, you bloody well bring up a bloody point about the bloody dropdown menu and how the bloody World Bank apparently (bloody) contradicts itself. You could consider it MENA, I suppose, because it is Semitic. That seems bloody reasonable to me. I'm personally not invested in including Malta; I only did so because I saw a source that included it. Since said source contradicts itself, feel free to remove it for all I care, but not all of the other reasonable additions (e.g. Western Sahara, greater Middle East, reference to Chinese culture instead of PRC, etc.) Bloody. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 20:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I have no idea how to talk to you, but (i) Semetic has fuck all to do with being part of MENA (never mind the question of what Semitic means in this instance). Iran is part of MENA, it's not Semetic, etc.; (ii) your Western Sahara obsession aside, MOST usage and sourcing, including MOST World Bank usage does NOT include Malta (nor W.S. - this latter for the simple reason they want to do business and not get bogged down to be sure). Stop being such a petulant partisan and if you want to "promote" your little WS cause, do so rationally. Bloody hell, I will even support you when you have a right bloody point. collounsbury 20:33, 20 June 2007 (UTC).

So bloody I never said that only Semitic-speaking regions should be included; I have no problem with Iran's presence. Again, exclude Malta for all I care - I only included it because for some reason, the consensus was to go with the World Bank definition and it contradicts itself. I don't really care. Again, I will refer you to the definition of MENA: Middle East and North Africa. Western Sahara is in North Africa, therefore, it is in MENA. A simple Google search of MENA map includes maps that have WS and ones that don't. Which is fine. I have no problem with some definitions excluding it. But as long as some do, we should include it (and any other potential MENA territories), in the aside that I added at the end of the article. I have to admit my own ignorance here: do you know if the WB coined the term? If not, then who? -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 20:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

REally bloody simple mate: it's not a bloody country. It (or Polisario wants it to be) wants to be, but it ain't yet. (collounsbury 10:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC))

Usage of MENA

Well, I see my little KOAVF Western Sahara agitprop promoter wishes to continue to argue from ignorance, as well as insert his wildly exaggerated obsession with Western Sahara into any topic even tangentially related. This is not just inappropriate, it's positively destructive to articles (as in here in re Malta).

Now, as for the question above, I doubt any single entity - and certainly not WB alone - coined the term. It arose out of both academic and business usage (esp. in financial world), and typically covers the "Arab World" states excluding the peripherals (e.g. Somalia and Djibouti), including Iran, sometimes Turkey although rarely, sometimes Pakistan, although rarely).

You can see typical private sector usage here: http://www.menafn.com/ (I should confess I know the owner of the business personally, but no matter for the substance) or here http://www.menareport.com/en/business/

Further, you can refer to Human Rights Watch own reference to MENA here: http://hrw.org/doc/?t=mideast and do note the countries included.

Finally, you can refer to International Crisis Group here http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=1096&l=1 and indeed you may wish to take the time to read their critical report on your beloved Polisario (not the shining bastion of liberalism you seem to think, every bit as nasty and unpleasant as the Moroccan Makhzen - but there ain't no bloody virgins in the Middle East / North African political realm, so no bloody surprise).

Now I hope you will bloody well stop your personal djihad to insert Western Sahara on every damn page possibly tangentially touching on the issue, or deface it due to your ill-informed, obsessive, narrow-minded partisan editing. It grows terribly tiresome. Try learning from Arre who is at once able to defend the W. Sahara POV without engaging in ridiculousness such as this foolishness with Malta. (collounsbury 10:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC))

Malta is included. Check the footnote at page 4. The reason i believe Malta is included is that it is ranked 134 out of 162 in terms of GDP (Purchasing Power Parity) being thus the last European country in the list (World Bank 2006 stats). It is also ranked 193 out of 211 in terms of GDP (real) growth rate. What bothers me is the way Justin uses Malta as a scapegoat to further his POV issues. I believe the matter is sorted out for the time being. -- FayssalF - 11:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I am aware World Bank occasionally includes Malta in its definition (although if you review their operational usage, as in the major "Doing Business" project, you find they do not typically include Malta in actual MENA analyses - not for economic, financial or socio-economic studies; I bloody well work on these issues (or rather investment) and track this quite closely.) I also note from footnote one in the paper you linked: 1 The definition of MENA followed in this paper includes: Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. - This matches typical usage. Of course, as I already noted Turkey is one of those borderline instances where it's hard to say if it is more commonly in the category or out. I am particularly annoyed with his vandalistic editing, as you say "as a scapegoat to further his POV issues." I also would strongly suggest that the current Western Sahara pages could and should be profitably edited to reflect the even-handed critique of all parties by the International Crisis Group (in particular the idealised vision kaovf keeps pimping re Polisario and its 'government in exile' - Moroccan and Algerian sins being rather more obvious and well-reported). collounsbury 11:25, 21 June 2007 (UTC).

Last word on this Western Sahara is a country (in no small part due to the fact that said term is far more vague than even MENA, and has no definition.) I again/still/forevermore have no vested interest in Malta being on this list, nor is it a part of my bloody personal djihad. I have no earthly idea why you want to escalate personal conflicts with your retorts and I wish you'd stop. I have read the reports (there were actually two released simultaneously) from the International Crisis Group, and they are, in fact, well-written, interesting, and I have no doubt accurate. (Do you see how I made that sentence without constructions like "If you weren't such a bloody ignorant child-fool you'd know there were two bloody reports on the bloody Western Sahara, bloody.") Never in my life have I claimed that Polisario were "virgins" nor anyone else in North Africa. Note that every bit of that post was irrelevant to the actual article itself except the second sentence. Why? Because you've just gone on a bloody personal djihad. If you want to talk about me, my editing, my views, feel free to post on my talk. If you want to talk about the MENA article, feel free to post it here. -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 15:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Country or Jupiter. You have to understand that MENA is a designation having to do w/ business. We don't have to hear the same arguments everywhere and all the time. If you have no vested interest in Malta being on this list than you are making a POINT. Please stop, it is getting boring indeed. Basta ya hombre! -- FayssalF - 20:44, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Stop your bloody whinging on mate. You bloody well deface article after article - on subjects you bloody well admit you're bloody fucking ignorant about - due to one bloody obsession. For the sake of a bloody fuck, take a breather. I gots opinions about South Africa, but I ain't no expert, so I keep my hands off. See what I mean? And as for Polisario - your edits show a gullible young fool regurgitating agitprop. Having an opinion is fine, but get some bloody perspective mate. I argue your side when you have a point, you've seen that, but god damn, you keep bloody editing this article inserting Malta, running on as supra about World Bank and then bloody well admitting you know fuck all about the subject you're editing. It is making a goddamned point and while you may not be bloody well "vested" in Malta, you are bloody well vested in defacing every other article with the slightest tangential connexion with your obsession with poorly thought out, poorly informed obsessive edits - as in here, repeatedly, against better advice, in ignorance. I don't go to your bloody talk page because I don't give a flying fuck about you, it's those few subject matters that I do know that I care about. collounsbury 00:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)