Jump to content

Talk:Kuwait/Archive 1

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

Pages to be added

I agree. Along with the following:

Its quite frustrating. I feel that im the only one creating pages in the Category:Kuwait category. Zer0fighta 05:15, 13 October 2005 (UTC)


Zer0fighta.... Show some democracy and listen to other opinions to have people help you. You can not clap hands using one!

  • First of all, I don't completely agree with democracy. I agree with team effort though. The above comment was placed over 6 months ago when no one was editing pages. I appreciate your work to help, but at the same time Wikipedia does have rules and regulations in certain areas.

User:Guptadeepak

Taken from history summary: "My own house in Kuwait was looted and fired at."

Gupta, let's not even try playing the "one-up real life qualifications" game, please. I'm sorry your house was one of many which caught bullets during the war, but your personal experience in Kuwait can't dictate the tone of (or violate the historical accuracy of) this entire article.

  • All I can say is please visit Encarta and britannia site to see how notable my claims are . I haven't written this out of my own personal experience . Its a plain simple fact .--IncMan 15:45, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

To imply that Kuwait was utterly razed during Iraq's retreat is a distortion. The oil fires set by Iraqi forces were the most notable destruction, and a building-by-building list of facilities which took damage is not appropriate for this article. You distance yourself from personal experience now, but you've twice now brought up the personal experience of having had bullets hit your house.

Perhaps it would be better suited in Gulf War?

  • First of all , tell me one sentence which indicates Kuwait was RAZED . Secondly , Kuwait's infrastructure was destroyed severely . I can give you several proofs for that . Go to UN's official site and see . And even if that doesn't seem notable to you , read Facts About Kuwait ,a book published by the Kuwaiti Govt . Thirdly , nobody is trying to mention the list of all the buildings destroyed by Iraqis . Thanks --IncMan 16:03, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

You claim that "much" of Kuwait's buildings were destroyed?

"Much of Kuwait’s industry, infrastructure, and buildings were destroyed. Among the most heavily damaged were palaces of the royal family, government and other public buildings, oil wells, and roads."

That, Gupta, is a list; one that paints an inaccurate picture, to boot. It's also more than the history section of a main aritcle warrants; again, perhaps you would prefer editing Gulf War or History of Kuwait? I've made note of the Kuwaiti oil fires, including reconstruction costs.

And for the record, I will not take books issued by the Kuwaiti government in good faith, so long as Kuwait is governed by the Emir.

  • Well I always thought that Kuwaitis had a lot of faith in their Emir . Anyways , thanks for the grammer corrections . I think I should write more carefully now . By buldings ,I meant the prominent structures in Kuwait . Moreover , if I had individually mentioned all the govt. and public buildings bombed during the war , you could have rightfully called it a list . And finally , its easy to argue . Will it be hard to have an endless discussion on why Humpty Dumpty sat on the wall ? --IncMan 17:09, May 19, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Apologies for my earlier argumentative tone, but I do hold the Emir to be a dictator (which he is, politically), and Kuwait's current "democracy" to be extremely lacking.

  • Which country's "democracy" isn't lacking? There isn't a single country which is not lacking a proper democracy. I slightly find your comments to be quite ignorant, no offense. The Emir is a monarch, yes, but in no way a dictator. The constitution of Kuwait has removed most of the power from the Emir and the rest of the royal family. Of course they still have an influence, but no official power. I see no reason to not accept a book published by the Kuwaiti government as a reliable source, especially if it is written in english. Zer0fighta 20:42, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Kuwaiti Hostility to the U.S.

  • I read in "National Review" I believe, or some other Conservative periodical back in the late 80's, that, in the 1970's, I believe, or the early 80's, that Kuwait "tried to get the U.S. currency to collapse, by with-drawing all of their oil-money from the U.S. economy all at once". Doesn't sound too friendly to me. And supposedly, since the U.S. "rescued" Kuwait after the First Gulf War, the Kuwaitis are now practically "floating in oil", and have become "so lazy, that they depend on 'domestic workers' to get anything done, and have cut their work-days to around four or five hours a day". And supposedly, they have already forgotten any feelings of gratitude they may have had for us (you know, like the French. After all, we only saved them from the Germans in Two World Wars). (Oct.)

You don't know anything you are talking about. You should go there for yourself and speak your own words before quoting some bitter person who wrote that. American private schools and the American University thrive in Kuwait. Majority of the population attend those schools. America has base established in the north and is the gate way used for everything done in Iraq. If everything is as was said I'm sure this would all be a different story.

I doubt that Kuwait would withdraw their investments in the U.S. to try and make the economy collapse. They would know they could not achieve because the U.S. is so much bigger than any other economy in the world. In regards to graditude they paid for the cost of the war and if you remember the French or any other U.S. ally did not pay for their liberation. Also, President Bush went back to Kuwait twice so that people could thank him. They named a street after him. Please remember, people in Kuwait are free to express their opinions and there is as much diversity in Kuwait as there is in the United States, both ethnically and politically. The relationship between the U.S. and Kuwait continues because Kuwait gave $10 million to the Katrina recovery. That does not sound ungrateful to me.

It is true that life style of Kuwaitis depends on domestic helpers, but that is also true of South America and many other countries in the Middle East and Far East. Here in the U.S. you have domestic help as well and just because you have domestic help does not mean you do not work. You just choose to work at something else. The workdays being cut to 4 or 5 hours a day is just not true. Work hours remain the same as always.

Pages on Kuwait to be created

I think the following should have pages created for them.

Banks:

Telecom Companies:

Schools:

Scientific Institues:

Hosptials and Medical Centres:

--Ahmed 09:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Iranian Kuwaitis

Someone does not like was added earlier. Are we in war here? I guess it is a fact that the following is true! Or are we living in denial?

""During the same period, many merchants from Persia/Iran, who are referred to as Iranian Kuwaitis, have settled down in the peaceful coastal area as well.""

  • Its not so much a "war", but it isn't a significant piece of information. A lot of people migrated to Kuwait. My family was orignially from saudi arabia, my grandmother originally from yemen, a lot of my friends were originally iranian, or iraqi, or from some other country/region surrounding the area. Its not denial, its just something repetetive that is not entirely important. This article is just an overview about the country, if you wanted to write more detailed articles and comments, then create another article about "ethnicities of kuwait" or something. I feel this shouldn't be something that belongs on the main page. -Zer0fighta 02:31, 30 April 2006 (UTC)


    • If you think that it is irrelevant to the History page, then I advice you to remove the Eniza Part. I will not do it, I will ask you to do it. Isn’t it a piece of information about ethnicity of people who formed Kuwait? We are not in war here, but I really suggest you consult your father and grandfathers. And ask them about the role that people from Iran played in ESTABLISHING Kuwait; their role is not a small role. It is a MAJOR one. Their role should be in the main pages of Kuwait’s history, not in the footers! They were merchants and the country’s economy, back then, was shaped and affected by the goods they possessed from the eastern states, Iran and India. If you think that it is irrelevant, this is your opinion. But, please respect the opinion(s) of the others, and let’s play music together like Kuwaitis from Different ethnicity groups. Deal? I know you are not a racist, neither am I. I respect where you came from, and it is a CROWN on my head, as we say in Arabic. Do I expect the same from your side? :) you can add what you erased, It is highly appreciated. I suggest, it should be mentioned in the history part as ""Kuwait was established by Arabs (from Arabian Peninsula), Assyrians (from Iraq), and Persians (from Iran)""; any other information about origins should not be mentioned in the main part. This would cover 99.99% of people who formed Kuwait. Details about those should be created in different categories. This way you can talk about your origin part (Najd), Iraqis would talk about theirs, and I would take the responsibility to start expanding the topics about Persian / Iranian Kuwaitis. What do you think? You will get knowing me more. I really believe in democracy and team-work! How is C++? Thank you,,, Zal 08:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
      • Alright. do as you wish. I honestly don't feel like repetetively trying to revert pages because its a pain. If you feel its that important then go ahead. -Zer0fighta 08:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
        • I will not do that alone. I need your help in this. OK? Zal 09:05, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I added some links that were deleted by User:Zer0fighta. I don't know why they were. They were all relevant links. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kuwait&oldid=52170504. --80.63.213.182 15:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello. Your relevant links were random wikilinks to words such as "fish", "water", "week" and "north". We appreciate your work but please read the Wikipedia:Manual of style. -Zer0fighta 19:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Why did the link to the Kuwait State television (http://www.arabisch.tv/tv/kuwait) get undone?

Official Language

The table at the top of the article states that English is an official language of Kuwait, with the parenthesised addition "widely spoken". However, the body text seems to indicate that Arabic is the only official language, with English also widely understood by the population. If the latter is the case, I believe it should not be included under "official languages". Could someone clarify? Jochietoch 12:36, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Government Stipend

I've heard that all Kuwaiti citizens, who can trace their Kuwaiti lineage back several generations, receive a very large government stipend as a dividend for the nation's oil revenues. Is this true? This would help explain why over 80% of the work force in Kuwait are not Kuwaiti citizens.

Na. Unfortunately thats not true. We do benefit from not having any taxes, and low gas prices etc. though. Actually, I appologize, members of the Al-Sabah family does have such a stipend. I do not know the exact ammount that is received but members of the Al-Sabah family do receive such a stipend. -Zer0fighta 19:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OWMC

Could you please take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/OWMC? The article OWMC will probably be deleted unless the facts in it can be confirmed. The Older Women's Muslim Community (Arabic: مكان الاجتماع لأجل نساء مسلمة أرشدة. ) is a health club for older Muslim women. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 03:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Motto

Is anyone able to provide a reference for the motto "For Kuwait"? Google didn't give me anything, and I think that the Arabic Wikipedia doesn't list a motto. Pruneautalk 19:08, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

per capita gdp

In the infobox, it is said that kwait's gdp per capita is $16,300. Later in the article, a figure of $22,800 is given. The CIA World Factbook claims $20,300.

What is the correct one? If different calculations are used (like ppp/not ppp) are used, it should be explicitly said. Jorge Peixoto 03:36, 23 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 Western Asia at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Western Asia whose scope would include Kuwait. 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 16:48, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Independence

The date of independance from Iraq should be added.

Not in CIA factbook, so it must not be that important------Cameron5dollarsuser:cameron5dollars 19:40 EST 6/1/06

Yes. I agree. And for that reason, we should remove all significant content from wikipedia that cannot be found in the CIA factbook. -Zer0fighta 00:01, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

The issue of independance from Iraq was said to have been the basis for the "re-unification" of the principaility to within the borders of modern day Iraq; this contended by the Hussein government. As such, it is a leading influence in Gulf War 1 and therefore, for historical significance and accuracy, it should be added onto the listing. There are clear grounds for asserting that the province of Kuwait was governed from Basra and was part of the wider Ottoman Empire.

If we do not reflect factually based and accurate representations, then Wikipedia merely becomes and extension of the CIA factbook.

Avenger786 14:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

"constitutional monarchy"

Is it right to refer to Kuwait as a, without qualification, "constitutional monarchy." I know that it's not an absolute monarchy like Saudi Arabia or Oman, but I feel like the term "constitutional monarchy," in the contemporary world, implies something like the UK or Belgium, not the kind of state like Kuwait, where the executive is still basically controlled by the monarch with almost no democratic input. Calling such a state a "constitutional monarchy" was already dubious back a century ago when Germany or Russia were examples. Isn't it all the more so now? john k 06:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Assyrians in kuwait

I think the claim that there is a large group of expatriates of Assyrians in Kuwait is not correct at all. --Wisamzaqoot 16:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Unsigned edits

"formerly, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were the only remaining Middle Eastern countries without women's suffrage." Er, should this be 'the only remaing Middle Eastern countries with male-only suffrage', or something similar but less unwieldy? So far as I know in the UAE there is no suffrage at all, which presumably means that the UAE has no women's suffrage.

I slightly expanded the paragraph on the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries of Kuwait. I know that one sentence is out of chronological order. Some help in organization would be great. Maybe that's too much information and should be moved the main article?

Kuwait has a rich cultural history that is not being reflected.

Hello,

Im a kuwaiti, i have edited this article to say that Kuwait has been part of the Ottoman Empire until the early 20th centuΉ NOT TRUE! I'm a kuwaiti myself, name for me the book that stated kuwait as part of the Ottoman Empire! if you really were a kuwaiti, then you would've least studied that in school. Kuwait never was part of the Ottoman Empire. check travellers' maps and you would see Kuwait as Kuwait, part of nothing!

Alright. Calm down buddy. The article itself doesn't have anything about the Ottomans. And trust me, the schools in Kuwait don't do too good of a job in teaching history unfortunately. Just because it was never taught doesn't meen it never happened. On the other hand, until theres a legitimate source which says so, the article will probably never state that Kuwait was part of the ottoman empire. -Zer0fighta 18:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

no one speaks the whole truth. nt schools, nt governments nor wise ppl! that i'm 100% sure of. however, we were given reasons to believe it was not part of the Ottomans, and those reasons made sense! such reasons include signing a deal with the English East India Company back in the 18th century. that was never bound to happen if Kuwait was part of the Ottmans. furthermore, that was part of Iraq's claim when Gulf War happened back in 1990, that Kuwait is part of the ottmans thus part of Iraq. and that was denied by the world nations.


Alright, who added the comment that closes the history portion-"Kuwait is a great country and people there are nice!"? (205.250.167.76 02:43, 6 April 2007 (UTC))

Why whats the problem with that, not that i added it-but i find that statement very true. Do you have a linked source that states otherwise?-aalsaleh
We're not supposed to write such emotional sentiment on wikipedia. (205.250.167.76 01:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC))

Demographics

There is some confusion regarding the largest expatriate community in Kuwait. According to Kuwait Embassy, New Delhi website, Indians form the largest expatriate community. This info might be wrong, but I was not able to find any Kuwaiti official source saying that Egyptians formed the bulk of the community. And please add sources to back figures. Somebody changed Shia/Sunni ratio to 9:1 (!) and it went unnoticed. This article needs some patrolling. --Grubb 07:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Women's suffrage

Hi, I am not trying to edit, but I do not understand this sentence:

"On May 16, 2005, Parliament permitted women's suffrage by a 35-23 vote, subject to Islamic law and effective for the 2006 Parliamentary Election."

How is women's suffrage subject to Islamic Law? I went to the Islamic Law entry and I couldn't figure out the relationship with women's suffrage and Islamic Law. Are women guaranteed the right to vote under Islamic Law? Or are women subject to certain voting stipulations under Islamic Law?

Well, from what I saw in the last elections, basically the voting booths are separate. -Zer0fighta 23:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Someone has added "misconcepted" to Islamic Law, since the first posting in the Women's Suffrage section. That single word seems to be poorly spelled and counter-productive. I tagged it as such. Segregating voting booths, as suggested above, seems not to impede one's suffrage so "subject to Islamic Law" seems to be an unnecessary addition. If women's votes were perhaps counted with less value than men's, that would be sufficient reasoning. Otherwise, segregated voting booths at most impose heteronormativity, as segregated sporting events, classes, prayer groups, clothing stores, salons, toilets, societies, &c. do, as long as facilities are equal. Thecurran 20:53, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

No natural lake?

Kuwait is the only country in the world with no natural lake or water reservoir

Can this be sourced? Are we sure that Vatican City has a lake? And Monaco? --Bletch 23:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I would also wonder about Western Sahara, the Maldives, the Federated States of Micronesia, Andorra, Singapore, San Marino, Kiribati, Tokelau, Nauru, the Solomon Islands, the Gambia, Vanuatu, Tonga, Samoa, Equatorial Guinea, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Trinidad & Tobago, Cape Verde Islands, and other countries geographically dominated by rivers or composed of small islands, or other micro-states. Thecurran 21:03, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Demography

Does anybody have a source for the notion that 35% of the citizen population is Shi'i? That contnow their children are Kuwaiti. Non-Kuwaiti men who marry Kuwaiti women are not given citizenship, unless something has changed recently.

Yes they can. They can apply for citizenship after three years of marriage. And mostly its easy to get it as long you're not from a previous enemy country. [[User::NameIess|NameIess]] 23:44, 17 January 2007 (KWT)

Hmm. very interesting point. I remember that many Kuwaiti men were marrieiti citizens. Nice edits --Deepak|वार्ता 20:23, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

YES, Non Kuwaiti women can recieve citizenship through Kuwaiti husbands but there is a certain time befor being able to do so, this is not vice/versa though. My cousin just became a Kuwaiti citizen through her husband and funnily enough i know a kuwaiti man ino wife who became Kuwaiti, wish i could give a source. 71.55.169.217 07:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I've actually heard that there are more Kuwaiti Shiites than the semi-official number of 35%, but that the Sunni monarchy has tried to suppress the data. Could this be anything other than rumor/conspiracy theory? User:Proon9288 00:03, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually every source I find puts the number at less than 30% but having lived in Kuwait for more than 5 years, even 30% seems way to high.I would have said more like 15%69.170.228.36 22:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


I have noticed that the recent change I had made to the Demographics section, pertinent to the Sunni-Shia distribution, has been altered. First of all, I am a Kuwait citizen, and I can more than assure you that Shias are far less than the 30% mentioned. In Kuwait's Pariliamen, for instance, there are only four Shia representatives/senators. The latter fact contradicts the 30% mentioned in the article, obviously. It is true that this number was cited from the CIA Factobook; however, CIA Factbook does not neccessarily provide accurate figures, neither does it mean anything mentiioned there, we can cite it as a fact blindly--we have to be sure and a citation from presumabley reliable source does not fulfill that. In fact, it is estimates that Shias, in the most case, constitute about only 20% of the population; other sources, however, estimate them as low as 15%, or even a little bit less. This sharply contrasts with the 30% given. Most sources that back my claim are, unfortunately, in Arabic; I cannot find any english source, neither can I find a Kuwait's-Goverment source since it does conduct such statistics. At least, if someone may think that mentioning what is mentioned in the CIA Factbook is sufficient, don't even talk about the Sunni-Shia distribution, because, simply, it is impossible this myth to be believed as true by any Kuwaiti, either Sunni or Shia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kuwaiti87 (talk • contribs) 08:12, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

To cut this short - give us a reliable source which says 20% Shi'a and I will have no objections to changing the figure. You can be the Emir of Kuwait himself for all I care but till you provide a source it counts as original research. Green Giant (talk) 12:46, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Improvement

Only the demographics sections was readable. I improved lead-in paras, Economy and History. Needs a lot of work. --RajatKansal (talk) 18:51, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Fourth richest country in the world?

I'm not sure about this. Might it be appropriate to mention that this is calculated from PPP per capita, rather than any other means of identifying a nation's wealth? When relatively small countries such as Luxembourg and Qatar are listed at the top, it pretty much negates the idea that this is a list of the richest countries in the world... Just my thoughts.. Headbeater (talk) 14:09, 23 April 2008 (UTC) Insert non-formatted text here

Strangely it seems to be using a 2010 estimate. Louis Waweru  Talk  18:10, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Changed it to the 2007 estimates. Louis Waweru  Talk  18:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Educational System

Can we please stop changing the page everytime a school feels the need to 'shine' above others, lets be fair and sensible, rather than desperate and pathetic. Thanks.

I agree, this was getting very long and messy with people name-dropping so many schools. I've cleaned it up as best I could, what it could use now is more relevant information on the system itself. Peasaep (talk) 16:25, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Warm Tropical ??

You are joking right ? Average low in Jan is 8 C, average high in August is 45 C, that is not tropical in any sense of the word, plus the precipitation is low. I think Kuwait has an arid, continental climate. I am invariant under co-ordinate transformations (talk) 19:04, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

we need some attention

the infobox code is not righht ??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 大西洋鲑 (talk • contribs) 11:01, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Kuwait's religiosity doesn't seem to add up.

The graphic showing religiosity gives the following stats:

Islam: 95% Christianity: 15% Hinduism: 12% Buddhist: 4% Other: 10%

However, that adds up to 136%, which doesn't make any sense.

Just wanted to bring that up.

140.180.188.32 (talk) 07:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism undone ??

April 9,'11 : an unregistered user has vandalized this page, changing everything that says "Persian" into "Arabian", apparently in an attempt to change the name of the Persian Gulf. This may have affected terms that did not need to be changed, such as references to cuisine and language, as well as the name mentioned in references at the bottom. I don't know how to ask users to attempt cleaning up; those hwo know please help !! Kamran the Great (talk) 01:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Ethnic Groups

In the 'Ethnic Groups' section of the article, Kuwait population is divided into "45.4% Kuwaiti Arabs, 32.8% Other Arabs, etc" which seems to be a division based on nationalities rather than ethnics.

There is no known ethnic group called 'Kuwaiti Arabs'. The 45.4% obviously refers to the percentage of Kuwaiti nationals living in Kuwait. Those Kuwaitis can be from different ethnic groups such as Arabs (Saudis, Iraqis, Bahrainis), Persians, etc.

However, I believe there is no available accurate statistics about ethnic groups in Kuwait.

Bodawood (talk) 08:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Climate data for Kuwait

In the 'Geography and climate' section, the climate data does not match the data from source (weather.com). For example, the average high temperature in August is stated in the article as 55c. However, it is 44c in weather.com.

Bodawood (talk) 08:32, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Religious freedom in kuwait

Although Kuwait allows you to practice your religion privately, the only religion besides Islam that is allowed to build a place of worship is Christianity. Hindu's Sikh's Buddhist's and any other religious minorities are not allowed to build places of worship or worship in public by law. Wikipedia states that all religions are allowed this, perhaps this change can be incorporated to make this information factually correct.

I do not have a source for this information because I have not spend much time trying to find an authentic one. My knowledge comes from having been born and raised in Kuwait and having lived there for 25 years. I am positive of this and other people that live there as well as experts will agree with me because these religious buildings do not exist in Kuwait legally. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Merlot123456 (talk • contribs) 05:47, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Confirmed: "The government does not recognize religious groups not sanctioned in the Quran, such as the Bahais, Buddhists, Hindus, and Sikhs. Members of unrecognized religious groups are unable to apply for visas and residence permits for clergy and other staff, build places of worship or other religious facilities, or request security and police protection for a place of worship."[1] I'll put the change through. Bromley86 (talk) 15:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Religion (Sunni:Shia and proportion of Muslim citizens)

I've summarised the evidence for the Sunni:Shia split over on Talk:Religion in Kuwait.

There's also a possible problem with the CIA Factbook (apparent) assertion that only 85% of the citizen population is Muslim. It's like to be about 100%, although I'd assume that some of those are more devout than others. This issue is detailed over there as well. Bromley86 (talk) 17:51, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Neutrality

The British comedian's opinion doesn't merit a mention in this article's media section. Wikipedia is supposed to maintain a policy of neutrality. Agrso (talk) 03:09, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Oppose. It's from a reliable source. It mentions the context of Les Majeste laws. It's a perfectly valid observation on the part of John Oliver. If the actual quotes of John Oliver had been included, then yes, it would have violated WP:NPOV. But the language used right now does not violate that. Myopia123 (talk) 03:49, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Official statistics for 2013

These statistics are taken from the official E-government website, they're great if anybody is looking for that. --Kuwaity26 (talk) 01:13, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 January 2015

May you guys please add the Crown Prince His Highnes Sheikh Nawaf Al Ahmad Al Jaber Al Sabah Under Government Tab here is his Wikipedia URL Bellow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nawaf_Al-Ahmad_Al-Jaber_Al-Sabah also can you guys please update his page with a picture these are the two best I found http://i989.photobucket.com/albums/af18/oditous2/Asia/KuwaitsCrownPrinceSheikhNawafAl-AhmedAl-Sabah.jpg http://www.kuna.net.kw/NewsPictures/2014/10/3/b5703d4a-3098-484d-a50b-f9a2340b457c_othermain.jpg

Thanks in Advance. NETSHARK8 (talk) 22:55, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  23:34, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

Undue weight, neutrality

The quote is undue weight. The quote is an opinion and hyperbolic. The article is delegitimized by the hyperbolic quote and other opinions stated as fact.

I'm trying to make the article more neutral. 80.184.99.15 (talk) 23:01, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2015

"Some Kuwaiti soap operas have become extremely popular throughout the Arab world, although they are usually performed in the Kuwaiti dialect, they have been shown with success as far away as Tunisia." Grammatically this is a run-on sentence. Please split into two. 86.179.191.90 (talk) 16:51, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Done Thanks, NiciVampireHeart 18:12, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Question

An edit I made to this page was reverted because apparently I stated opinion as fact. In reality I was wondering why the wording of the section was past tense as it just ended on this note:

Following statement is what I added to, in the golden section

Kuwaiti society embraced liberal and Western attitudes throughout the 1960s and 1970s.[51] Most Kuwaiti women did not wear the hijab in the 1960s and 1970s.[52][53] At Kuwait University, mini-skirts were more common than the hijab.[54]

Both sources [52], and [54] state that the 'golden age' came to an end after the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and Iranian revolution caused a resurgence in Islamism in Kuwait, read page 306 to 307 of source [52], after stating that most Kuwaiti women did not wear the Hijab and that a new islamist minister was appointed: PAGE 307 "they were benefited from a surge in religious fervor in Kuwait and across the Arab world"

The Chicago Tribune [54] article sited, leads to page 2, literally scroll down a bit, and this is something I will copy and paste "As in much of the Middle East, the Islamist movement in Kuwait rose from the ashes of the humiliating Arab loss to Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War and the death of Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser, a champion of secular pan-Arabism. The failure of secularism spawned a religious revival that offered salvation to the Arab world, a movement that gathered strength on the success of the Islamic Revolution in Iran."

Can I than ask why the revision was removed for stating an opinion as fact? 2/4 articles used in this paragraph went on to talk about it but that info was left out, and when I added this info in it was removed. I would understand if I used bad sources, but I didn't add any, I used the ones already here.

perhaps it was the way I worded the addition on to the paragraph: "However with the appointment of Yusuf Al-hajj (head of the 'social reform society'), and the Iranian revolution, a surge in religious fervor hit Kuwait, reviving interest in Islam."

Regardless, my question is why is there no info on the religious fervor when the sources literally state that right after the info mentioned on Wikipedia.

Disclaimer: not saying anything against anyone, just confused as to why info I got from the sources was labeled my opinion when I literally didn't know anything about this until I read the sources for info on Kuwait pre-invasion.

70.69.168.225 (talk) 00:09, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

An edit I reverted has been re-done without discussion. I'm logging it here with a fuller explanation in case others wish to take a look.

Nothing seems to be horrendously broken, but I still don't see how this edit is an improvement:

  • Other citations nearby use the {{google books}} template to construct links to Google Books. I don't see a reason to change the template to an explicit "books.google.com" link in one individual case – seems unnecessarily inconsistent.
  • Edit summary states "direct URL to the page", but I don't see that. Parameter "pg=PA222" doesn't seem to have any effect, because Google Books does not have an image of the page to link to. (At least, not when I go there ...)
  • Changing "id=e2LLngEACAAJ" to "id=qVBjiaTROe8C" appears to link to a different edition of the book, but it is not explained why we need to make that change.

– Wdchk (talk) 17:31, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Kuwait. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 01:09, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Kuwait. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 12:19, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Kuwait. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 13:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

There are 18 Bahá'í ??

"There is also a small number of Bahá'í Kuwaiti citizens,[149][157] it is likely that 18 Kuwaiti citizens follow the Bahá'í religion.[150][note 1]"

The only source in English gives an estimate of 400. This is very little but still far more than the 18 suggested.

Possible vandalism but I don't know how to find that. Could someone fix this please?

Liberivore (talk) 18:16, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Liberivore (talk · contribs) I have changed the Religion section with new statistics. Kuwait's PACI produces official statistics that shows only 2 ethnic Kuwaitis have declared a religion other than Muslim or Christian. Of course, that doesn't mean there aren't any, and in any case the only declaration option other than Muslim or Christian is "Other" Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:53, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Religion Statistics

On 18 May 2016 I made an edit [2] to revise the Religion section. Before my edit some of the data and the chart relied on 2007 figures from the US State Dept. Kuwait's Public Authority for Civil Information [www.paci.gov.kw/stat] now publishes official figures, and on the day I did the edit the figures were as at 31 Dec 2015. I used the website's open access Statistical Designer tool to produce to extract data for "Population and Labor Force" and then added Column data for "Brief Nationality" (Kuwaiti and non-Kuwaiti, and Row data for "Relegion" [sic]. I copied the data from those statistics to my edit. I titled the chart (2016) which is technically wrong because the data was as at 31 Dec 2015. On 20 May 2016 Agrso (talk · contribs) reverted my edit [3] saying "Misleading barbox not supported by the references, it's not "2016 data"" but the revert had the effect of deleting my other amendments. I have undone this reversion, corrected the date in the chart title, and corrected the reference which pointed to paci.gov.kw but to my previous expired session. Please discuss here first if you wish to make further revisions or are unclear on how to use the PACI tool - I'll be happy to help. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:37, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

agrso (talk · contribs) your edits here [4] and here [5]] do not make Wikipedia better, and do not use the edit-revert-discuss cycle. Please discuss your proposed changes here and seek consensus. And what is done elsewhere (a single chart) doesn't automatically make sense here (a single chart unnecessarily skews the data for ethnic Kuwaitis) Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:19, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Ethnic Kuwaitis are only 30% of the total population. They are a demographic minority. It is unnecessary to have a different barbox for Kuwaitis and non-Kuwaitis. In Wikipedia articles, there is always one single barbox for the overall population. It is trivial to have a barbox for an ethnic minority. You already have the PACI data in detail in the paragraph, where the religion statistics are broken down based on nationality. There has never been a Wikipedia:Good article of a country with two religion barboxes based on nationality. Agrso (talk) 20:28, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
agrso (talk · contribs) I have asked you, twice, to discuss edits here and achieve consensus before editing on this subject but you have just made another edit [6]. You said "Unexplained removal of content". The explanation is outdated information that I removed and replaced with up-to-date data. The outdated information is "estimated to be composed of between 259 and 400 Christian Kuwaiti citizens". The up-to-date data is "263 (0.02%) are Christian". Would you please undo your own edit since I don't want to get into an edit war. Thank you for your view about barboxes. However, it is not, as far as I can see, Wikipedia policy (please correct me if I am wrong). It is true that "Ethnic Kuwaitis are only 30% of the total population" but since their religious affiliation is significantly different from the remaining expatriate population it is simply misleading to present data as a consolidated group. Such data, at a glance, might lead to the impression that 17% of Kuwaitis are Christian which in fact is very far from the truth. I am trying to make the encyclopedia better and, for now, I am assuming that you are too [WP:AGF]. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 05:00, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
The US Department information is more reliable than PACI statistics, which are often inconsistent. Kuwaiti government online statistics are locally taken with a grain of salt. The US Department of State is more factual. It is important to present estimates, alongside govt statistics. The religious orientation of expatriates in Kuwait is not significantly different from Kuwaiti citizens, the majority of expatriates in Kuwait are Muslims. Barboxes are not even necessary for such a small sub-section. Many Wikipedia:Good articles don't have a religion barbox, such as Brunei, Bulgaria, Malawi, New Zealand, Philippines, Scotland, Wales, England, and Hong Kong. Religion barbox is not a necessity in Wikipedia, especially in small sub-sections where the data is succinctly present in the text. Agrso (talk) 17:24, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you agrso (talk · contribs), that's helpful. I'll look for ways to make the barbox less prominent. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:46, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Map is not useful

Hate to be critical, especially as I'm not in a position to contribute better, but the map here is very poor. The "high level" view is too high, and the "low level" view doesn't contain any labels that show the viewer any context.

Facetious Nickname (talk) 03:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I noticed this too. We're currently using a globe view: File:Kuwait on the globe (Afro-Eurasia centered).svg with a tiny little red highlighted Kuwait which we can hardly see, particularly when scaled down. We're also showing a buggy caption "Arabian Peninsula (light yellow)" (but the image shows all the rest of the landmass as light yellow!). I'd fix that but the template is fiddly
Anyway, this map seems better for a high level view of where Kuwait is:
-- Harry Wood (talk) 09:38, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

"most democratic country"

User:Warnerdang made an edit to change "..Kuwait the most democratic country in the region" to "...Kuwait the most democratic country in the Middle East, behind Israel". This might be true, but the 1st and 2nd references clearly have region to mean the Gulf, not the Middle East. I can't read the 3rd reference from WSJ because it's subscriber-only. What does it actually say? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:25, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Change line about democracy involving Israel.

"making Kuwait the most democratic country in the Middle East, behind Israel." This should be changed because Israel is an apartheid state and is not democratic at all. Although it is common propaganda rhetoric for zionists to falsely claim that Israel is the only democracy in the middle east, which is also dangerous propaganda to be feeding into here by accepting the claim that Israel is a democracy and not an apartheid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.62.198 (talk) 15:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Languages Heading

There is no language called "Indian".

~Pranav Kamojjhala — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.205.217.8 (talk) 14:52, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

The Democratic Issue

The sentence "Kuwait is the most democratic country in the region" repeats twice in the article, given as a fact. Let's make a little fact-check:

  • If the discussed "region" is the Middle-East, Kuwait is certainly not the most democratic country, since Israel is in the Middle-East too, and there's an undoubted concensus that Israel is the most democratic country in the area. Israel is ranked 29th in the Democracy Index, while Kuwait 121st.
  • Kuwait is neither the most democratic Arab country, as Jordan, along with Iraq are ranked 117th, and Tunisia is 69th.
  • And finally, Kuwait is not even the most democratic in the Persian Gulf. As to the Democracy Index, Iraq is the 114th most democratic country in the world, 7 above Kuwait. BTW, Iraq is mentioned in Wikipedia as in the Persian Gulf.

It seems to me that the above sentence reflects more the wish of the writer, rather than reflects the actual reality. Indeed, there are worse dictatorships aside it. However, if there's one title Kuwait cannot be given, it is "Democracy". Let's say gently that it's not one of Kuwait's characteristics, certainly not one that should be mentioned in a serious Wikipedian article.
Apparently, the only place where Kuwait is considered "the most democratic country", is Kuwait.
Therefore, until Kuwait gives its citizens & residents basic human rights, fair elections & free press, I have no choice but to remove these propaganda sentences from the free encyclopedia.
CNR (talk) 17:42, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Certainly, triumphalist if not outright propagandist. El_C 18:02, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
I just noticed that the "fact" that the media in Kuwait is the freest in the Arab world, repeating a few times. Seems like someone did a hard work trying to improve the country's image. There are a lot of other Arab countries that are better than Kuwait in this subject, such as Mauritania, however I basically think that even if it was the freest country in the Arab world, it's still one of the countries with the least free media. It maybe should be mentioned in Norway's article that it is has the freest media in the world, not here. Generally, it'd be great if someone can help me rewrite this article, which is full of inaccurate information and competition with other countries, rather than just telling the truth about the country. CNR (talk) 18:06, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

'Arabian Gulf' v 'Persian Gulf'

Which is correct? Ochib (talk) 11:52, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Certainly Persian Gulf, as written in Wikipedia itself. CNR (talk) 13:21, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Obvious nonsense?

May be it isn't but at first glance the following line in the article strikes me as such:

Kuwait's press was described as one of the freest in the world

Yes the given website is cited correctly, but the line if taken literally seems highly questionable to me. Maybe somebody claimed that (falsely) at some point, maybe it was meant to refer to the Arab world at the time. But claiming that a country under an authoritarian/autocrat rule was one of freest in the global world seems highly questionable. In short that line needs better sourcing and/or more details or it should be removed.--Kmhkmh (talk) 20:14, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

@Kmhkmh: Agreed. Censorship in general is extremely high in Kuwait. How is this resolved? Do we find a contradicting source. Such as https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2015/kuwait Myopia123 (talk) 16:12, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Well the "obvious" answer is to find a better more reputable source that describes the press (freedom) in Kuwait during that time more accurately and replace the current text and source. Alternatively (easier but less optimal) one might decide to simply drop that line and its source, since it isdn't exactly an authoritative source that needs to be mentioned.
Note however that the better more reputable sources need to refer to the same period rather than just assessing the current or most recent state. Because of that freedomhouse site is probably not really suited for the task.--Kmhkmh (talk) 17:22, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

kuwait

kuwait is beatiful country you should come here there is traditoinal fodb and — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.96.55.89 (talk) 09:40, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Gulf War I

One author's recent additions seem an attempt to make it sound as though Kuwait was utterly razed after Gulf War I.

  • I would like to inform you that my sources are BBC and Britannia Website . The bombings and destruction of Kuwait Intl. Airport and Main Harbour (not aware of the name - think Shuwaik Port) and also that of the Royal Palace prove it . One can also visit Encarta site to check how notable my claims are . My own house in Kuwait was looted and fired at .Please sign your comments . thanks . --IncMan 15:40, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • I am not sure what you're talking about. I think you're mistaking the 2nd Gulf War with the first. There has been a Gulf War I which was between Iraq and Iran. Kuwait also got involved and it had its only offshore oil refinery destroyed, the late emir -sheik jaber- had a failed assassination attempt, several local cafes were blown up and other bombs were defused on the last minute.

--Abdulaziz 22:48, January 17, 2007 (KWT)

Note on Infrastructure

Not much attentioned is paid on information about Kuwait's Infrastructure. Shouldn't we have a new catigory?

Timezone

Timezone of Kuwait +4 on summers? No way.

Other discussion/Questions and requests

It would be interesting to know the percentage of Kuwaitis that are Shi'ites and Sunnis. The statistic given of percentage Sunnis/Shi'ites on the current page takes includes expat Arabs. This is important to know whether the government is fairly represented by both sects and does not discriminate.

Add Kuwait to...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_colors_of_national_flags —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.80.113.143 (talk • contribs) 23:36, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 04:58, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

Help request

Can we add a date in the establishment section in the info box where Kuwait regained independence from Iraq.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.185.245 (talk • contribs) 01:21, 18 March 2020 UTC (UTC) struck help request from sock of Shingling334 --IamNotU (talk) 03:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Done. Huon (talk) 02:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

"Administrative divisions of Kuwait" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Administrative divisions of Kuwait. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 26#Administrative divisions of Kuwait until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  17:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:30, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:53, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:15, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

COI tag (July 2021)

Some of the IPs regularly editing the article are directly registered to or regularly affiliated with Kuwaiti government. If you work for Kuwait, either directly or indirectly, consider that it may be inappropriate for you to directly edit the article given an obvious conflict-of-interest. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 09:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

I've never claimed to be a Wikipedia administrator. Nor is it against policy to express a possible COI concern. Anyone is permitted to do this. The mention of NPOV (or rather, the more general neutrality policy) is simply part of the template itself, and not something that I wrote. It's automatic, and you might have noticed that it does not actually even imply that there are necessarily any violations; it just states that the article should be checked for neutrality. You say that all of the IPs in 2021 belong to you? I ask because many of them appear to be static, yet if they're all you, then they must be dynamic. Symmachus Auxiliarus (talk) 09:39, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

IPs & Mobiles

It appears that the IPs & mobile edits might be from the same individual. GoodDay (talk) 16:38, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Sources don't support the claims

In the #corruption section many sources don't support the claims in the text.

It is misrepresenting sources and WP:SYNTH.

Some people tried removing it because sources don't support the claims. But someone is regularly reversing the removal. User:Agrso 2:42 11 September 2021 UTC

Hello Agrso. Which claims are you concerned about in particular? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:24, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello MrsSnoozyTurtle, In a nutshell, the entire section is original research and makes sweeping claims, is non neutral, references do not correspond to the claims, and does not flow logically. Logical flow: For example, why is the section on the ruling family a subsection of a corruption section which is itself a subsection of the political system subsection? Would it not be more neutral and contextual to have the ruling family as a subsection of the political system (3.1)? Why does that "ruling family" subsection then discuss topics such as "lack of economic diversification" and human rights abuses? Those topics should be covered under the economy and human rights sections. Sweeping claims: for example, having a sentence like: "The Al Sabah ruling family are highly controversial in Kuwait for their wide range corruption" is a value judgement, original research, and a non neutral perspective. It isn't supported by the reference. The cited reference in alleged support of this claim is an article about the resignation of a former prime minister and minister of defense due to a corruption scandal. The former ministers are currently being tried and are currently detained, which is page-worthy in my opinion but not included. The section was originally drafted by anonymous user IP: 188.71.205.192 on Aug 20, 2020 that only worked on two pages: "House of Sabah" and "Kuwait" and included the exact same text that is the topic of this conversation in both. Regards, Sentientwo (talk) 09:51, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello Sentientwo. Thank you for responding on behalf of Agrso. I agree that the wording could be tightened up and there are possibly better ways to integrate this section into the article. But the section is well referenced and the text does relate to the sources, so that does not justify removing it altogether. Regarding the sentence that you identified, I would not object to it being re-worded, however the sources do implicate the Al Sabah family in the corruption. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:54, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello MrsSnoozyTurtle, as per my previous comment, the entire section was originally drafted by an anonymous user and is original reporting, and a non neutral point of view. Your reversion of this section citing IP user reversion is incorrect. The example sentence you responded to is "synthesis of published material" aka SYNTH which is original research and in breach of Wikipedia rules. I will attempt to move the human rights, economic diversification, and IOC sub topics to the relevant sections to better integrate the material into the article. Regards Sentientwo (talk) 09:31, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Pro-Government Propaganda, POV-pushing, and whitewashing

The Money Laundering Scandal was widely covered by Western Media Outlets and there was a Media blackout Gag order locally within the State of Kuwait. It was widely discussed in local Social Media and by many famous Kuwaiti politicians (MPs), lawyers, media personalities, activists, and social media influencers. Removing well-sourced facts regarding members of Al Sabah ruling family involved in Money Laundering Scandal that shook Kuwait is non-NPOV, very unprofessional and unencyclopedic. The Money Laundering scandal was among the Biggest corruption scandal that ever rocked Kuwait. Anything critical of the Al Sabah ruling family is reverted by IP editors affiliated with the Al Sabah ruling family and Kuwait government. There are two "user accounts" who are closely related to these IP editors. They seem to believe they own the Wikipedia article (per Wikipedia: Ownership of content). These IP editors and users remove negatives about Kuwait from the article, which seems to make the article less balanced. They are always engaging in Edit Wars. Very unprofessional. This article is being gutted and made seriously non-NPOV by these pro-government IP editors who have close affiliation with the Al Sabah ruling family. Various prominent members of the Al Sabah ruling family have been implicated in controversies. Anything mildly critical is automatically reverted by non-NPOV editors. Even the reliable references are removed. Especially the accurate information regarding the high-profile Money Laundering scandal which was a major issue in Kuwait. These IP editors are pushing the false narrative that Kuwait is a "democracy" under the form of a "constitutional monarchy" despite the fact the Kuwait Constitution directly identifies Kuwait as a "Hereditary Emirate" (not constitutional monarchy). Constitutional Monarchy =/ Hereditary Emirate. It is about time that Wikipedia administrators are involved in deterring these POV-pushing IP editors who are reverting anything critical of the Al Sabah ruling family. Whitewashing (censorship) goes against Wikipedia policies. Very clear Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.63.144 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello Anonymous IP User,
I can’t speak for others, but I have a sincere personal interest in the subject matter and maintaining the quality of the page and improving its class rating. I won’t respond to your accusations, attacks, and speculations regarding the motivations of editors but will attempt to unpack the points you did make and respond to those below:
* Form of government – Kuwait is a constitutional monarchy as per the CIA World Factbook and Encyclopedia Britannica which have been referenced. The page does not claim Kuwait is a democracy.
* “Money laundering scandal” – Taking a step back, the original edits of the page were made by an anonymous IP account (from the same country as your IP) that created a standalone “Corruption” subsection under the “Government” section. This was unique amongst country pages. As a sense check, if we look at the country pages of Somalia, South Sudan, and Syria, which are the three countries with the lowest scores on Transparency International’s “Corruption Perceptions Index,” (which ranks every country in the world by perceived corruption level) none of them have “Corruption” sections or subsections on their Wikipedia country articles. For reference, Kuwait’s 2020 rank on this list was 78 out of 180, which puts it in the top half (less corrupt) of the 180 countries ranked (where lower ranked countries are more corrupt). This corruption subsection had a single subsection titled “ruling family” that had references to human rights abuses, criticism of the economy (its lack of diversification), and the past suspension of the Kuwait Olympic committee. In the interest of preserving this content and its neutrality, I moved the subject matter (critical of the government) to the human rights, economy, and sports sections. As far as individual scandals go, the academic consensus is that they are widely publicized locally in the context of ruling family succession rivalry playing out in the political realm, because of the role of the popularly elected parliament in endorsing succession. This context was provided and the academic literature was comprehensively referenced. In the interest of being thorough, I created subsections for two scandals involving several senior ruling family members (all former ministers including prime ministers) that met the WP:EXTRAORDINARY threshold: they both resulted in several resignations from office and were covered by international press agencies such as Reuters and BBC. The specific scandal you are referencing is limited in relevance and credibility due to it involving a junior member of the ruling family who did not hold public office, seems to involve a personal feud with a convicted fugitive, is poorly sourced, and is not generally relevant to the country politics or its ruling family. Regards, Sentientwo (talk) 12:15, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:07, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kuwait/Archive_1&oldid=1168805084"