DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

Wiki Article

Talk:Qatar

Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net

Xem trên WikipediaBài ngẫu nhiên khác

RfC on connection to terror

[edit]
Newer rfc below 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 14:59, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


For about a year, the section on Qatar's connection to terror was included in the article for the last year. The section is properly sourced, relying on WP:RS. Recently, certain users have been trying remove it, claiming that it violates Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Other countries have sections on notable controversies on their Wikipedia pages, for example Afghanistan#Human_rights, Saudi_Arabia#Allegations_of_sponsoring_global_terrorism, Myanmar#Genocide_allegations,_Organ_trading_and_human_trafficking, Nigeria#Communal_conflicts, Venezuela#Corruption, Egypt#Freedom_of_the_press.

Should we restore the following text in the article? Fidjeri (talk) 08:55, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relation to Terrorism

[edit]

Qatar has been criticised for allowing terror financiers to operate within its borders, with accusations originating from intelligence reports, government officials, and journalists. In 2014, U.S. officials, including David S. Cohen, claimed that Qatar had failed to take action against blacklisted individuals living freely in the country. Despite introducing anti-terrorism laws in 2004 and updating them in subsequent years, Qatar faced allegations of supporting groups like Hamas, which it denied, stating its goal was to facilitate constructive engagement with the Palestinian Authority. These concerns contributed to the Qatar diplomatic crisis from 2017 to 2021.[1][2][3][4][5] Fidjeri (talk) 08:55, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Saudi Arabia and allies expand Qatar blacklist". Al Jazeera. Retrieved 2025-09-17.
  2. ^ "السعودية والبحرين والإمارات يرحبون بتصريحات ترامب بشأن "تمويل قطر للإرهاب"". BBC News عربي (in Arabic). 2017-06-10. Retrieved 2025-09-17.
  3. ^ Kells, Michelle Hall (October 2015). Ximenes, Vicente Trevino (05 December 1919–27 February 2014). American National Biography Online. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/anb/9780198606697.article.1501399.
  4. ^ "Chapter 7 Terrorists We Like and Terrorists We Don't Like". Images That Injure: 51–55. 2003. doi:10.5040/9798216973942.0012. ISBN 979-8-216-97394-2.
  5. ^ Elnakhala, Doaa’ (20 April 2021), "National counter-terrorism responses: France", Global Jihadist Terrorism, Edward Elgar Publishing, doi:10.4337/9781800371309.00021, ISBN 978-1-80037-130-9

Discussion

[edit]
@Fidjeri This is not a neutral RfC statement. The statement should only be "Should we restore the following text in the article?" plus the text. You can move the For about a year, [...] paragraph to your own !vote. Otherwise, this violates WP:RFCNEUTRAL 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 09:08, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I stated the facts the way they are, it is your interpretation about the neutrality of the Rfc. You can make an Rfc on my Rfc Fidjeri (talk) 10:26, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Summoned by bot) @Fidjeri: You may be 100% correct on the content issue, but I agree with Abo Yemen regarding the RFC question: this is not the kind of neutral RfC question required by WP:RFCNEUTRAL. Specifically, WP:RFCNEUTRAL requires a brief, neutral statement that sets out the question of the RFC. I would encourage you to withdraw this RFC and begin a new one with a the simple statement, "Should the following text be restored to the article? (followed by the quoted text)" You can argue your reasons for including the article text in your !vote or in the discussion section, but it should not be in the RFC question. If this is issue is not resolved, this RFC will probably be speedy closed as malformed. Aoi (青い) (talk) 20:06, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, i followed your advice and opened a new one Fidjeri (talk) 06:23, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RfC on connection to terror

[edit]

Should the following text be restored to the article? Fidjeri (talk) 06:22, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relation to Terrorism

[edit]

Qatar has been criticised for allowing terror financiers to operate within its borders, with accusations originating from intelligence reports, government officials, and journalists. In 2014, U.S. officials, including David S. Cohen, claimed that Qatar had failed to take action against blacklisted individuals living freely in the country. Despite introducing anti-terrorism laws in 2004 and updating them in subsequent years, Qatar faced allegations of supporting groups like Hamas, which it denied, stating its goal was to facilitate constructive engagement with the Palestinian Authority. These concerns contributed to the Qatar diplomatic crisis from 2017 to 2021.[1][2][3][4][5] Fidjeri (talk) 06:22, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging @User:Aoi, @Abo Yemen, @Lukewarmbeer, and @Redrose64 who participated in the previous RfC. Fidjeri (talk) 07:47, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Polling

[edit]
Yes. Allegations of terror financing and support for terrorism in Qatar have received sustained coverage in high-quality sources over many years. That's a very notable controversy. The section should remain, with improvements: expand sourcing, attribute claims, include Qatari responses and more high quality analyses. Rafi Chazon (talk) 15:30, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. The section violates quite a lot of policies (see Talk:Qatar#"Relation to terrorism" section). 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 15:44, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, the section is WP:Undue, and such accusations are from unsavory regimes that themselves are considered major terrorism sponsors, such as the UAE, KSA and Israel, and stem mainly from political disputes and aren't grounded in reality. Furthermore, their "ties" to terrorist groups are mainly at the request of their accusers: Israel asked Qatar to host Hamas' political bureau and the US asked them to host the Taliban. Their support for militant Islamist groups is based on tenuous sources which attribute state support to individual donors. The country's only substantiated links to what could be considered terrorism lie in their support for Islamist regimes, such as Mohamed Morsi in Egypt or Hamadi Jebali in Tunisia, whom the state funded. Any other allegations are completely unsubstantiated and not supported by non-biased sources. Elspamo4 (talk) 05:10, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. Per User:Abo Yemen and Elspamo4 R3YBOl (🌲) 20:49, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No - First the 2014 bit is WP:UNDUE. The rest is WP:SYNTH. Qatar's diplomatic spat with its neighbors in 2017 was not due to Qatar's hosting of Hamas. Grimforge (talk) 02:43, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but with some changes. It seems inescapable that Qatar’s relation to terror financing be addressed in its main article, regardless of determinations on the subject itself, since it has been a meaningful point of contention in its foreign relations with critical countries such as the US, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, etc.
In terms of its relations with Saudi, UAE, Bahrain and Egypt, allegations of Qatari state-sponsored terrorism were cited as a main reason for the Qatar Diplomatic Crisis, which is a very meaningful episode of the history of the State of Qatar. The section should be re-written to better reflect the consensus on the motives and substance of these allegations.
In terms of its relations with the US, a crucial ally, various US agencies and representatives have pointed at terror-financing originating from Qatar (and allegedly not facing enough resistance from the state) throughout the 2000’s and 2010’s, eventually leading to the signing of a new Memorandum of Understanding between the two to improve Qatar’s Combatting of Terrorism Financing. The US Department of State has since published multiple reports on this matter, indicating that it has historically seen terror financing as a point of contention in its relations with Qatar, even as it reports on Qatari progress in this matter.
Overall, the claims that the section should not exist seem untenable given that this has been such a pertinent issue in the country’s foreign relations with critical partners and rivals such as the US and Saudi, but the section should definitely be re-written to properly reflect the nature of the various allegations, they way in which they have affected Qatar’s foreign relations, and the ways in which said allegations were (or are being) resolved. BlookyNapsta (talk) 12:46, 28 October 2025 (UTC) Struck edit made by compromised account used for block-evasion.)[reply]
The current proposed text implies that Qatar for hosting Hamas contributed to a previous political crisis between Qatar, Saudi, UAE, Egypt. That crisis where they unsuccessfully tried to pressure Qatar to stop support - according to them - to the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic State, al-Qaida and Lebanon’s Hezbollah.. except for Qatar's support to Muslim brotherhood's Egyptian President Morsi the rest of these claims have no merit. Regardless of these claims, Hamas, as the current proposed text being requested to be added, is not among them. In fact, none of these countries designate Hamas as a terrorist organization themselves. The current proposed text is disingenuous. Grimforge (talk) 06:59, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but... (summoned by SodiumBot). Since the article Qatar and state-sponsored terrorism exists, it seems like there should be some kind of summary of it in the main Qatar article. I don't know if the paragraph in question is the best summary of that other article, but it would be better to rework it than remove it altogether. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 09:45, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I agree with @Barnards.tar.gz:. This is clearly a notable controversy on the countries, and we do show information about notable controversies in many country articles. The wording could be improved for clarity and more content should be added. HHRIA123 (talk) 12:36, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, but... (Summoned by bot) I think as written this section violates a number of policies (synth, MOS:TERRORIST) as well as maybe being some kind of promotional content for this David S. Cohen figure, who seems to be referenced whenever this topic comes up. (This is my weakest complaint, and might be just me finding a pattern where there isn't one.) Linking to the main article on the topic somewhere in the article would make sense, though. Smallangryplanet (talk) 20:14, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the arguments above against restoration are not convincing, as every sentence in the paragraph appears to represent fact, regardless of the character of the quartet nations, which is not the discussion here. See Lynch who clearly states that the accusation of providing financial support for terrorist organizations was central to the position of the quartet against Qatar at the time.[6] Qatar offered sanctuary "to members of Saddam Hussein’s family, one of Osama bin Laden’s sons, a Chechen warlord, Egyptian sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi who who advocated for suicide bombings,[7] and exiles from Syria, Libya, Sudan, and Lebanon"[8] as well as to the leaders of the Taliban [9] Hamas and Hezbollah.[10], and Qatar has in fact been criticised for it. "Qatar has provided financial support for Hamas for years"[11] and did in fact refute the allegations with the explanation stated.[12] It is not undue, simply because it is a substantial part of Qatari history if not part of its present, and it has implications for the future. In all honesty I think the paragraph needs expansion. KiltedKangaroo (talk) 15:37, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]

For about a year, the section on Qatar's connection to terror was included in the article for the last year. The section is properly sourced, relying on WP:RS. Recently, certain users have been trying remove it, claiming that it violates Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Other countries have sections on notable controversies on their Wikipedia pages, for example Afghanistan#Human_rights, Saudi_Arabia#Allegations_of_sponsoring_global_terrorism, Myanmar#Genocide_allegations,_Organ_trading_and_human_trafficking, Nigeria#Communal_conflicts, Venezuela#Corruption, Egypt#Freedom_of_the_press. Fidjeri (talk) 06:30, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for listing examples of similar sections. Out of the examples listed, I'd say that the Myanmar and Saudi sections are most similar. For the Myanmar section, their genocide is currently recognized by the United Nation's highest court. For Saudi Arabia, their "sponsoring global terrorism" is in large part due to the citizenship of 19 of the 25 hijackers of the 9/11 flights, which was the most lethal incident of terrorism in history, and involved allegations of government officials involved in the plot. The article also notes that their citizens are the biggest sponsors of terrorist groups worldwide. I'm personally not convinced that it's on par with Qatar's alleged support of Hamas, or any other of its "terrorist" activities I'm aware of. Elspamo4 (talk) 05:14, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Fidjeri, can you close the first RFC you started. Having two RFCs on the same thing at the same time isn't helpful. TarnishedPathtalk 05:49, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should we not simply reference (and update as required) our article [Qatar and state sponsored terrorism]Lukewarmbeer (talk) 17:36, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, exactly. We should summarise that article and link to it with a {{main}} heading. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 09:47, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Shouldn't this RfC fall under WP:PIA since it is directly related to the Arab-Israeli conflict? 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 14:18, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Saudi Arabia and allies expand Qatar blacklist". Al Jazeera. Retrieved 2025-09-17.
  2. ^ "السعودية والبحرين والإمارات يرحبون بتصريحات ترامب بشأن "تمويل قطر للإرهاب"". BBC News عربي (in Arabic). 2017-06-10. Retrieved 2025-09-17.
  3. ^ Kells, Michelle Hall (October 2015). Ximenes, Vicente Trevino (05 December 1919–27 February 2014). American National Biography Online. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/anb/9780198606697.article.1501399.
  4. ^ "Chapter 7 Terrorists We Like and Terrorists We Don't Like". Images That Injure: 51–55. 2003. doi:10.5040/9798216973942.0012. ISBN 979-8-216-97394-2.
  5. ^ Elnakhala, Doaa’ (20 April 2021), "National counter-terrorism responses: France", Global Jihadist Terrorism, Edward Elgar Publishing, doi:10.4337/9781800371309.00021, ISBN 978-1-80037-130-9
  6. ^ Lynch, Edward A. (2022). Isolating Qatar: The Gulf Rift 2017-2021. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. p. 104. ISBN 9781955055154.
  7. ^ Lynch, Edward A. (2022). Isolating Qatar: The Gulf Rift 2017-2021. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. p. 126. ISBN 9781955055154.
  8. ^ Lynch, Edward A. (2022). Isolating Qatar: The Gulf Rift 2017-2021. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. p. 47. ISBN 9781955055154.
  9. ^ Lynch, Edward A. (2022). Isolating Qatar: The Gulf Rift 2017-2021. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. p. 51. ISBN 9781955055154.
  10. ^ Lynch, Edward A. (2022). Isolating Qatar: The Gulf Rift 2017-2021. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. p. 97. ISBN 9781955055154.
  11. ^ Lynch, Edward A. (2022). Isolating Qatar: The Gulf Rift 2017-2021. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. p. 126. ISBN 9781955055154.
  12. ^ Lynch, Edward A. (2022). Isolating Qatar: The Gulf Rift 2017-2021. Lynne Rienner Publishers, Inc. p. 126. ISBN 9781955055154.

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2025

[edit]

Hello. The line "According to the V-Dem Democracy indices Qatar is 2023 the second least electoral democratic country in the Middle East" (under "Politics") is grammatically faulty, and therefore also unclear. I would suggest changing it to something like "According to the V-Dem Democracy indices, as of 2023 Qatar was the second lowest in the Middle East Electoral Democracy Index." Two more issues: 1. The archived source attached to this statement is from 2022, not 2023. 2. Perhaps it would just be better to bring the statement up to date to the latest version of the index. According to the 2025 report, Qatar is still second-last in the Middle-East on the Electoral Democracy Index, and seventh-last in the world (173/179).

By the way, I am new to Wikipedia, and English is not my primary language. I apologize if I am not operating within the accepted procedures here.

Thank you, The Diver (Ghawwas) غوّاص العلم (talk) 11:48, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Day Creature (talk) 16:32, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Day Creature, I did not realize I could edit a semi-protected article. Or rather, I think perhaps at the time I submitted this request I did not have the permission to, and now I do.
It is so much easier to edit on English Wikipedia than it is on Arabic Wikipedia! There, we need approval for every single edit, no matter the article.
Thank you for your assistance and guidance,
The Diver غوّاص العلم (talk) 12:08, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is so much easier to edit on English Wikipedia than it is on Arabic Wikipedia! There, we need approval for every single edit, no matter the article.
This is so true, and they dont automatically give you the permissions to edit automatically when you're experienced enough. The admins there gotta like you first 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 14:19, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Abo Yemen Thank you, it's nice to hear at least that it is not just my experience... You can take a look at my user there and see that someone there just denied almost all of my edits just because they didn't like how I moved some tanwins to the letter before the alif, and then replied pretty evasively to my questions and complaints. Maybe I'll get back to editing in Arabic at some point, as our Wikipedia needs so much improvement, but people here have just been so much nicer and more welcoming. Maybe the two issues are not unrelated... غوّاص العلم (talk) 12:22, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should Demographics in Info Box be Separated into Citizens and Non-Citizens?

[edit]

As the title suggests. I didn't want to make this change without consulting first, and potentially hearing from people's general experience and wisdom on this.

I think that at least for the population part we should also put down citizens and non-citizens, but perhaps we should also include details of ethnicity and religion for citizens in particular? It seems kind of odd to me to fully group together the citizen and-non citizen populations as if they are exactly the same to the country. Giving the overall statistics obfuscates the fact that the citizens of the country are basically 100% Muslim (Mostly Sunni with Shia minority) and Arab.

I'd like to hear what other people think. Of course, if there is agreement that this is an appropriate change to make, it would make sense to also make it in other countries with massive non-citizen populations, such as UAE, Saudi Arabia, etc.

Many thanks,

The Diver (Ghawass) غوّاص العلم (talk) 13:02, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no, since that part of the infobox is for ethnic groups and not the other demographics 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 13:06, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello brother Abo Yemen,
I'm not sure I understand your response. Yes, there is a part of the infobox that is about ethnic groups, one that is about religion, and one that is about overall population. My suggestion is that It is not necessarily the natural choice for these boxes to only show the statistics for overall residents of the country, when only ~12% of them are citizens. Surely you at least agree that the "population" part of the infobox is misleading as is, simply saying the population is over 3 million, when actual citizens of the country number only about 1 10th of that? Why not add "Citizens: X / Non-Citizens Y / Total X+Y", or something of the sort? غوّاص العلم (talk) 13:34, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Diving a bit more into these matters, note how the Qatari National Planning Council Census calls the citizens "Qatari" and the non-citizens "Non-Qatari". It just doesn't make sense to me for us to put up the statistics for Qatar's population with no distinction between citizens and non-citizens. غوّاص العلم (talk) 14:05, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]