Talk:Mohamed Morsi/Archive 1

Archive 1

(Comment)

More importantly, hes the MB's backup presidential candidate since a week ago and with the main candidate disqualified, he's poised to become the next President of Egypt so someone should flesh out this page ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.56.255.22 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

File:DR.mohamed.morsy.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:DR.mohamed.morsy.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:DR.mohamed.morsy.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:48, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

official results not yet announced - status as president

There have been a series of competing edits alternately ascribing Morsi the title of president or deleting the presidency-related infobox. SCAF has yet to announce the official results of the election. Shouldn't the infobox be removed until he is confirmed as president? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abulubada (talk • contribs) 17:01, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I completely agree. I am going to take the initiative and remove the box saying he is "President of Egypt" because he categorically is not, even if he has won the election - the results are not yet announced - it remains to be seen if he will be inaugurated. Even if he is to be inaugurated, he will not assume office immediately. I hope other editors will support this decision and report any subsequent vandalism!Aetheling1125 22:29, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Please, let's wait until Morsi is inaugurated (July 1), before we put fifth President in the intro. GoodDay (talk) 15:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. When referring to politicians, it's proper to use the term "-Elect" until they're inaugurated, look in the history for for Barack Obama's page between November 6 2008 (election day) and January 20 2009 (inauguration day). "President-Elect" rather than President is used throughout the article DavidSSabb (talk) 18:57, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

This article needs semi-protection, as the Ips continue to insert that he's already president. GoodDay (talk) 21:08, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Morsi opposes democracy and favors discrimination ?

The man elected president of Egypt, Mohamed Morsi, heads a party with a platform priciple that no woman and no Christian or Jew may run for or be elected president of Egypt (Egypt Independent, Sunday June 24, 2012 - http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/node/352738). This is particularly important to include in our encyclopedic entry, one would think, in light of the fact that the mass media are dumbing down the news they report (see CBS Evening News, ABC World News, and NBC Nightly News) breathlessly saying not much more than: the Egyptian people have "chosen democracy", and that a dictatorship has been replaced by a "democratically elected" government. No one can force ABC NBC and CBS to point out that it is a democratically elected dictatorship (!), but at least our encyclopedic source of information can report to Wikipedia users that the new government forbids democracy, unless it is their "democracy". (No Women, Christians, or Jews, allowed to be elected democratically). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.2.190 (talk) 20:00, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't think the article you've provided in the link matches what you're saying.

"Mohamed Morsi, heads a party with a platform priciple that no woman and no Christian or Jew may run for or be elected president of Egypt"

The article you linked to says that they (the Muslim Brotherhood) would not put forward a woman or Christian for President. It doesn't say that they wouldn't allow one to run for President, just that their party wouldn't put one forward. In fact, it says that they have no intention of imposing this on others:

Saad al-Husseini, a member of MB's Guidance Bureau, the highest executive authority within the group, said the new party program will be announced late March after it is approved by the MB’s Guidance Office and Shura Council. Al-Husseini said that although they stick by this view, they "respect all opinions”.

"Our adherence to the jurisprudential opinion refusing the appointment of women or Christians as president does not mean we impose this opinion on the people, who have inherent jurisdiction in this regard," he said.

"No Women, Christians, or Jews, allowed to be elected democratically"

Jews aren't mentioned in the article you've linked to, but it doesn't say at any point that any of the groups of people you mention wouldn't be allowed to be elected democratically. Again, from the article:

Saad al-Husseini:

“I personally accept for Copts to be appointed in hundreds of positions, including sensitive leadership positions in the country in accordance with the criterion of efficiency and competence, regardless of their proportion in society.”

Mohamed Morsi:

"During an interview on state-owned television on Sunday night, Morsi said, "The civil state sought by Islam and the MB would ensure equal rights for Copts.

He pointed out that the new party will not discriminate in its membership between Muslims and Christians, or males and females, and that it will represent the politically focused side of the group, while the MB will continue to practice all of its social and preaching activities."

--Voiceofplanet (talk) 21:55, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Wants closer ties to Iran

Morsi has been reported to say that as president he would renew ties with Iran and review the peace treaty with Israel.

And what is wrong with including this? Hcobb (talk) 17:00, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Probably nothing. The article should/will be heavily expanded anyway on policy positions, among other things. Trinitresque (talk) 17:44, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Ties with Iran

Egypt denies Morsi gave interview to Iran's Fars agency "The Egyptian presidency on Monday denied that president-elect Mohamed Morsi gave an interview to Iran's Fars news agency, in which he reportedly pledged to strengthen ties with the Islamic republic." http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/46170/World/Region/Egypt-denies-Morsi-gave-interview-to-Irans-Fars-ag.aspx

So apparently he did not mention wanting to improve ties with Iran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Turnopoems (talk • contribs) 23:18, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Wow. I stand corrected. I'll remove the Jerusalem Post source. Trinitresque (talk) 00:08, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Morsi the humanitarian

I deleted the spin doctoring someone added, ascribing (in the words of Morsi's publicists and spokespeople) "humanitarian reasons" to "explain" why Morsi is calling for the release of the terrorist mastermind. In the speech to the cheering crowd Morsi didn't say he was calling for the release for "humanitarian reasons" in fact, the tone was quite belligerent and the context was that he was calling for his release because, in his mind, the terrorist mastermind is one of the good guys (!). I submit that those who think that it's "humanitarian" to release the terrorist mastermind consider what the following people would say to that, if they could:

Monica Smith age 35, a secretary, who was seven months pregnant, was in her office checking time sheets in the B-2 level. Robert (Bob) Kirkpatrick, age 61, a locksmith, was eating lunch in a room next to Smith's office. Bill Macko, age 47, maintenance worker, was also eating lunch. Stephen Knapp, age 48, maintenance supervisor, was eating lunch with Macko and Kirkpatrick. John DiGiovanni, age 45, a dental products salesperson, was parking in the underground garage. Wilfredo Mercado, age 37, a receiving agent for Windows on the World restaurant, was checking in deliveries.

Let's let the speech speak for itself, and leave the publicist/spokespeople spin out or our encyclopedia, I'd say. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.10.29 (talk) 03:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Your argument is completely beside the point. It doesn't matter if it is ridiculous or not to request that a man be released under humanitarian reasons for Wikipedia's purposes. And it doesn't matter if you think the clarification is spin doctoring. It is either way clearly an attempt to clarify what was said by Morsi. And is it relelvant? In this case, definitely. Morsi said that he would try to release Abdel-Rahman, then the spokesperson said that Morsi would specifically try to have him extradited to Egypt on humanitarian grounds, and that it does not mean that Morsi considers him a political prisoner or that he would try to overturn his conviction. That's relevant. Both you and I disagree with Morsi, but it's still relevant. Trinitresque (talk) 04:41, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Though I am indeed of the personal opinion that it is ridiculous to argue for the release of a convicted psycho mass murderer based on "humanitarian reasons" (recall the 2009 "compassionate release" of Pan Am Lockerbie terrorist Megrahi to Libya, and the 2008 release of terrorist Kuntar to Lebanon - both of which found the terrorists unrepentant and praising terrorist acts after their release) that was not my point. Rather, my point was that it is ridiculous for Wikipedia to parrot the spokesman's spin, when, upon looking at the actual stories reporting on the speech, it was obvious that humanitarian reasons had nothing to do with it. Rather sympathy for what the man did, is it.

Res Ipsa Loquitur. A similar spin was put above to the "honor the treaties" business - he said "he will honor all treaties" and westerners (as well as journalists and Morsi spokespeople) are rushing to add that he "must mean" the treaty with Israel too (wishfull thinking). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.14.169 (talk) 06:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

As Wikipedia editors, it's not our job to decide what is and what isn't spin. If something is relevant, we include it in an article. And the comment made by the spokesperson is definitely relevant. If you find a reliable source that describes the comment as spin doctoring, then that can be included in the article as well, after the comment is included. Trinitresque (talk) 06:49, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Reliable source or not? If yes, it's ...significant.

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_05_13/74584752/

“The Koran is our constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our path and death in the name of Allah is our goal,” Morsi said in his election speech before Cairo University students on Saturday night. Today Egypt is close as never before to the triumph of Islam at all the state levels, he said. “Today we can establish Sharia law because our nation will acquire well-being only with Islam and Sharia. The Muslim Brothers and the Freedom and Justice Party will be the conductors of these goals,” he said.

Pär Larsson (talk) 12:47, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I couldn't find a secondary source, except unreliable ones that cite the Voice of Russia. Trinitresque (talk) 14:31, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

http://www.israeltoday.co.il/NewsItem/tabid/178/nid/23270/language/en-US/Default.aspx Same quote, no source cited, I suppose it's possible that it's just the media echo chamber repeating the Voice of Russia writing. Funny how mainstream media hasn't picked it up, I figured at least Fox so-called News would have.Pär Larsson (talk) 14:36, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

This: http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/46170/World/Region/Egypt-denies-Morsi-gave-interview-to-Irans-Fars-ag.aspx Trinitresque (talk) 15:04, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Article you link to appears to have nothing to do with the quote above. What?Pär Larsson (talk) 20:47, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

You appear to be right. I'm not sure why I did that; I might have replied to the wrong section. Trinitresque (talk) 22:13, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Is Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh his new vice-president?

I haven't found anything on the net, but his article and the Vice President of Egypt article now claim so, after an unsourced edit by an anonymous IP. Is that true? -- megA (talk) 16:46, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

EDIT: AS I see, this has already been reverted over here, so I'll do the same over there... -- megA (talk) 16:51, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Reason for Morsi political upheaval

I've heard that some Arabic media is claiming that Morsi and Tantawi were fighting (not physically) before Morsi fired Tantawi. Apparently, Tantawi said he had evidence that the 5 August attack was perpetrated by terrorists from Gaza. Tantawi insisted that for this reason, the Egyptian-Gaza border (Rafah crossing) should be closed once and for all, as a threat to Egyptian national security. However, Morsi said that Palestinians would never accept closing the border (Morsi had made promises in the past to Hamas to open the crossing more and lift the Egyptian blockade on Gaza). However, Tantawi said that this decision is to be made by the military (SCAF), and Morsi said that he (Morsi) is rather the supreme commander of the military. Hours after this, the reports said, Tantawi and some other officials were quickly replaced, as a result of this.

Sources: [1], [2].

Is this reliable enough to be included (not as a fact, but attributed as "According to some Arabic media...) in the article? I believe so, but others may have different opinions.

Thanks.

--Activism1234 18:30, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Hey Activism, until we get some confirmation from more mainstream sources (including from the Egyptian/pan-Arab media), it looks to be nothing more than hearsay. I'd opt on not including this bit, as interesting as it sounds, even if we attribute it to those two sources specifically. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:10, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me. Thanks. --Activism1234 05:18, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Error

Error in page: the sidebar is titled "thomas douglas". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.221.158.49 (talk) 05:24, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

A passing vandal, swiftly reverted. Thanks for pointing it out. Khazar2 (talk) 05:39, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

where is the pic?

Can someone post a photo of the president pleeease? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asserghozlan (talk • contribs) 18:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Possible BLP violation

An IP was recently reverted for trying to make this paragraph in the article neutral:

When asked what he thought about Christian Copts supporting Ahmed Shafiq Morsi said, "They need to know that conquest is coming, and Egypt will be Islamic, and that they must pay jizya or emigrate."

The entire paragraph should actually be removed. This is a wild accusation that the secondary reference [3] used in the article raises doubts about. The original interview is in Arabic and I am not aware of that website's reliability. Surely, a crude statement like this would have the caught the attention of the mainstream news outlets of the world or in Egypt itself, but I have not come across this so far in my daily M/E news updates. I could be wrong, but until further verification I am going to remove this paragraph which infringes of the guidelines of a BLP article. --Al Ameer son (talk) 20:39, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Wrong Arabic Translation

As a speaker of Arabic, Morsi didn't "outlaw" anything, he prevented his decrees from being challenged in a court until the new constitution is made and the new parliament is elected in 2 months.

Source:

The Full Text of the Declaration (in Arabic) can be found here:

http://www.facebook.com/egpres.sm?ref=ts&fref=ts

134.76.63.66 (talk) 04:28, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Isn't this a matter of semantics? If his dictates cannot be challenged at this time, then is it not against the law to challenge them at this time? And would someone that did not be subject to legal action? ProfessorTofty (talk) 04:36, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, you're just being an apologist for a dictator. This guy is going to be trouble. HammerFilmFan (talk) 04:43, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't think there's any need for that - I believe the original poster's objection was made in good faith, but the point stands - given what the decree states, "outlaw" is not an unreasonable interpretation. ProfessorTofty (talk) 04:46, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Collapsed under Talk Page Guidelines. See WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion

i just want to say that an authoritarian leader can be a benevolent leader. morsi may be what egypt needs at the present time. another "strongman." an authoritarian leader who is, in fact, a BENEVOLENT strongman. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.195.22.209 (talk) 05:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Statements on Two-State Solution

The following sentence has been the subject of an edit war:

"In 2010, Morsi stated that "The two-state solution is nothing but a delusion concocted by the brutal usurper of the Palestinian lands."

It is factually correct, not disputed, properly sourced (by Morsi himself when he was at the Muslim Brotherhood no less), and fittingly placed in the Foreign Policy section of the article. I am re-adding this to the article, and if there is contention about it I would appreciate it if some discussion happened here (instead of curt "out of context" notes in the page history). Regards 80.220.125.41 (talk) 07:46, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Someone put it under Political Career section - where it might arguably belong - apparently he has not made this statement since coming to office (even if he 'thinks' it). Hope someone can find a better citation source than the Muslim Brotherhood's official site - their leader has already been shown not to be either objective nor wholly truthful (claiming Morsi's letter to Perez was a fake, for example.) Surely some news service noted this statement and pub'd it?HammerFilmFan (talk) 09:07, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Lead section

Morsi's November 2012 declaration seems to be one of the most noteworthy things about him so far - would it be worth adding something regarding it to the lead section of the article? ProfessorTofty (talk) 03:47, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Linking of "pharaoh"

A while back, I linked the term "pharaoh," in the article. I see that link has since been removed. I realize that Wikipedia is not a dictionary, but not everyone may know what a pharaoh is, nor why the term might be relevant in relation to this move by Morsi. Agree? Disagree? Thoughts? ProfessorTofty (talk) 03:53, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, I have re-linked it.130.188.8.27 (talk) 08:47, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Sidelined judiciary and November declaration: fatal flaw in article

This entire article's integrity is destroyed by the mention of the sidelined judiciary in connection with the November 2012 declaration. That is, the judiciary is mentioned but not that it is Mubarak's judiciary. Are we to imagine that these judges were honest and intelligent all the years that Mubarak was torturing, cheating, aiding the enemy, etc., and not to omit acquiring a huge personal fortune? On the other hand, this point is so obvious that its omission in so many "mainstream" sources merely documents the depravity of the mainstream in these revolutionary times. Chrisrushlau (talk) 01:30, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

I've removed time lines dealing with the judiciary. It is impossible to say whether the declaration is "justified" and Wikipedia is not the arbiter of whether it is or not (WP:NPOV). The article you linked is a single foreign commentator, who is well informed, but cannot possibly be given equal footing with the rest of the actors in this (WP:UNDUE). Lastly, the government has not made an explicit connection between the judiciary's actions and the declaration, but the content you added does, and the discussed motivations of the judges is very clearly WP:OR. The source was from 6 months before the current unrest started, so while it might be interesting to include this text in a general article about the declaration, it is clearly out of place in an article that deals with Morsi the individual. 80.220.125.41 (talk) 17:20, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Mohamed Morsi

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Mohamed Morsi's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Kirkpatrick":

• From 2012 Egyptian protests: Kirkpatrick, David D. (7 December 2012). "Morsi Defends Wide Authority in Egypt as Turmoil Rises". The New York Times. Retrieved 7 December 2012.
• From Hosni Mubarak: Kirkpatrick, David D.; Shadid, Anthony; Cowell, Alan (11 February 2011). "Mubarak Steps Down, Ceding Power to Military". New York Times. Retrieved 11 February 2011.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 23:13, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

November 2012 Protests

Do we have an individual article for this yet? Massive protests and violence now happening throughout Egypt in relation to Morsi's "constiutional coup" move. ProfessorTofty (talk) 19:41, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

This entire article's integrity is destroyed by the mention of the sidelined judiciary in connection with the November 2012 declaration. That is, the judiciary is mentioned but not that it is Mubarak's judiciary. Are we to imagine that these judges were honest and intelligent all the years that Mubarak was torturing, cheating, aiding the enemy, etc., and not to omit acquiring a huge personal fortune? On the other hand, this point is so obvious that its omission in so many "mainstream" sources merely documents the depravity of the mainstream in these revolutionary times. Chrisrushlau (talk) 01:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, this is a wiki, so if you can think of a good way to express this within the article itself, feel free to edit it. Oh, BTW, an article has now been created - 2012 Egyptian protests. ProfessorTofty (talk) 20:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Support from Persian Gulf countries?

With the notable exception of Qatar, Morsi doesn't seem to have the support of Gulf countries. The source backing the statement only says "Countries in the Persian Gulf have been even more overtly supportive. Qatar, for example, announced that it would lend Egypt US$2 billion just as Morsi announced the reshuffle." This vaguely (and inaccurately) implies he has Gulf support. UAE officials have been particularly critical of him and the Brotherhood[4] while relations with Saudi Arabia could be described as out of necessity at best. The Saudis were arguably Mubarak's strongest defenders during the revolution and have long outlawed and persecuted the Brotherhood in their own country.[5] Kuwait also seems to be wary of Morsi's presidency and their own MB. Basically what you have in the Gulf is, for lack of a better word, paranoia that the MB is rapidly gaining power in the region and creeping on Gulf territory as well. There certainly needs to be more information on Morsi's complicated policy with the Gulf, but until then I will clarify the sentence to better reflect the reality of the situation. --Al Ameer son (talk) 00:33, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Off-topic comment and political editorializing, not relevant to discussion of article

morsi idk anything about morsi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.213.197.139 (talk) 01:29, 15 December 2012 (UTC) I do. He's a corrupt, Israeli/American puppet appointed by the CIA to complete mubarak's work of making Egypt nothing but a corrupt puppet dictatorship of the US and Israel and a huge free source of oil. It is a fact that the muslim brotherhood was created by the British colonials as a way for them to control the ignorant natives through yelling "Allahu Akbar" and "La Ilaha Illa LLah", just like in Saudi Arabia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.187.85.136 (talk) 13:51, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Vice president - resigned

His vice president has resigned - I wasn't sure I should simply remove the name from the infobox or if there was a replacement, so I simply added "Resigned" by it for the time being. ProfessorTofty (talk) 18:59, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

why have you removed the section on his support for Female Genital Mutilation

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/8185dd5c-c5c0-11e1-a5d5-00144feabdc0,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F8185dd5c-c5c0-11e1-a5d5-00144feabdc0.html&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Ftheahafoundation.org%2Fnews%2Fnews-news%2Fin-egypt-female-genital-mutilation-fgm-remains-a-common-practice-against-girls-with-egypts-new-president-morsi-calling-it-a-private-issue-that-he-will-not-actively-combat%2F#axzz1zz4E51bW

When parliament criminalised it in 2007, some of the fiercest opponents of the law were from the Muslim Brotherhood.

His response caused uproar, particularly among children’s and women’s rights advocates who have been working for years to change the perception of the procedure in the society.

if there is a technical issue, there is no need to remove the entire topic?

Please rewrite it without the e-mail address and personal comment. Donner60 (talk) 22:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

9/11 section

For a few reasons, I've removed a section about Morsi's affection for 9/11 conspiracy views that relies solely on a Washington Post editorial. First, the section's sole source is an opinion column by a guest columnist; it would be better to find some news reporting that covers these. Second, making this a full section header, while things like "Foreign Policy" and Morsi's November '12 assumption of unlimited powers are subsections, is clearly undue weight. This may belong in the article in some much more limited form, but until more extensive sources are provided, I think a full section to this controversy is far too much. I'm happy to hear other opinions, though, if anybody else has further sources. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:35, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Reverted, as the information is highly important and relevant, and other reliable English language sources can easily be found which address Morsi's comments on 9/11 e.g [6], [7], let alone in Arabic. There may be scope to include the information within another section, but complete removal is not right. The President of a major country has stated explicitly and on multiple occaisons that in his view the "official" story of 9/11 is a fiction. That is of great interest to readers. Rangoon11 (talk) 23:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

No, that is not of great interest to readers. While this can be mentioned, giving it its own section is WP:UNDUE. I'm cutting it back to make it only a couple lines long. Also think about WP:BLP.VR _talk 04:15, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

The 9/11 comments don't deserve their own section, but the text that it was replaced with was not adequate. I have fleshed out the content in the Political Career section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.188.8.27 (talk) 11:07, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

That much detail about something that is quite insignificant about Morsi is a violation of WP:UNDUE, especially because he is a living person. Morsi is now president, known for far, far more important things than 9/11 comments.VR _talk 14:57, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Those statements are very important for this article because it shows Morsi to be a complete nutter as well as an anti-Semite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rouroiej (talk • contribs) 22:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

That's precisely why the content should be scaled down. Wikipedia is no place to smear living persons. Go take your politically motivated campaign elsewhere.VR _talk 04:09, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

With regards to Morsi's political position, his beliefs about the attacks are very important. This wasn't second-guessing police work; this is espousing racially and ethnically-charged conspiracy theories about an event witnessed in real-time by millions, an event that further went on to define how the West (and especially the US) interact with the rest of the world. And this person isn't just some anonymous poster on the internet; he is the president of one of the largest countries in the world, which is right now in revolution. To cut down his comments to a milquetoast phrase like, "some have taken offense" is to deliberately leave readers uninformed. Lastly, truthfully reproducing comments in the context that were made (as they are here) is absolutely not BLP or a smear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.188.8.27 (talk) 08:48, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Obviously highly relevant. If a person is making such accusations, it should be in the article. A couple of points of comparison: George H. W. Bush article talks about his "vision thing" statement. And the Duane Chapman "Nigger" statements have their own section in his article.William Jockusch (talk) 21:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of page?

The deletion of the page seems entirely unnecessary. What was the rationale for the requested deletion? David O. Johnson (talk) 08:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

The person who apparently "requested" the deletion by blanking the page only has 3 edits. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Morsi%27sDemons It seems that it was an act of vandalism, not a request for deletion. David O. Johnson (talk) 09:01, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Organization

The Presidency section for the most part deals with Morsi's presidency. That makes sense. However, the first paragraph on Israel/Palestine and the recently added paragraph however dont. Why are they there? nableezy - 00:24, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

The comments to which you are referring to were originally made by Morsi in 2010, but they did not come to light until recently.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 01:25, 17 January 2013 (UTC))

Im referring to several comments, but as to the ones you are referring to, no, that isnt true. What is true is that they have recently come to the attention of Western news agencies. Explain to me why comments made several years prior to his being a politician, much less president of the republic, belong in a section on his presidency. Im not saying it cant or shouldnt be included, but it does not belong there. nableezy - 02:22, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

When I said that these comments have only recently come to light, I meant that they have not been widely reported or commented on until recently (although this is apparently true only in the case of Western Media). But getting back to the issue at hand, these comments have been included here because it can be assummed (and not unreasonably) that Morsi's comments in 2010 (less then 3 years ago) are indicative of both his past (and quite possibly current) attitude towards Israel/Palestine. Of course, it's certainly possible that Morsi has mellowed out since then, but due to the nature of his remarks (i.e. refering to Israelis as tailless catarrhine primates), they are very difficult to ignore. Given the fact that Israel/Palestine is both a very sensitive and important issue for Egypt at the moment, Morsi's comments are certainly relevant enough to be included in this section. Likewise, given the fact that Western media outlets have widely reported these comments, it certainly meets the requirement for notablity.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 03:54, 17 January 2013 (UTC))

All right, first of all notability doesnt apply to the content of articles. Second, I didnt say remove it. I said it shouldnt be in a section on his acts as president of Egypt. nableezy - 03:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd have to disagree with your first point; Notability is certainly relevant to the content of Wikipedia articles. As for your second point, they have probably been included here because there is no section (or separate article) that details Morsi's political views and statements in a broader sense (i.e. given the current structure of this article, grouping his comments on Israel/Palestine into this section is the most efficient option at the present time).(Hyperionsteel (talk) 04:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC))

Please read WP:N, particularly the line These notability guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not limit the content of an article or list. For Wikipedia's policies regarding content, see Neutral point of view, Verifiability, No original research, What Wikipedia is not, and Biographies of living persons. As to the second sentence, Im not trying to determine why they are they are, Im trying to discuss where they should be. Do you think that statements made before he was even a politician belong in a section on his presidency? And if yes, why? nableezy - 15:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

It appears I may have confused the concepts of WP: Notability with WP: Due weight. I should have been more careful about that. But let's get back to the issue at hand.

You have essentially asked the question "[Why] statements made before he was even a politician belong in a section on his presidency?". My answer is simple: these comments were widely reported and discussed by the Western Media during his Presidency; most, if not all, of the sources cited are from 2012, not 2010. Wikipedia editors are not linking these comments to his presidency - the mainstream media has done a fine job of this by themselves (and this has been reflected here).(Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:48, 17 January 2013 (UTC))

That isnt true. Every story that I have read about the most recent brouhaha explicitly says that the comments were made prior to his being the president. There is no reason to include it in a section on his presidency. I am going to rearrange things a bit more, making the presidency section about, you guessed it, his presidency. nableezy - 15:41, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I admire your ability to state the obvious. You are correct: Every story does states explicitly state that these comments were made prior to his being the president. Why? Because these comments were made prior too his presidency. Clearly, you seem to have missed the point: the comments were made before he became president but they were widely reported and discussed by the Western Media during his Presidency. Why? Because the relationship between Egypt and Israel is a significant issue right now, and considering that Morsi views Israelis as members of the biological superfamily Hominoidea and the Sus genus, one can certainly wonder (and in fact, the mainstream media has wondered) how Morsi will conduct himself with regards to Israel during his Presidency.

However, if you want to move this material too another section, that's fine. As I said earlier, there is no subsection or separate article broadly detailing Morsi's political views and statements. If you want to create a subsection dealing with these statements (and in fact, I see that this has already been done) this material can be easily transfered there (and there is certainly no need to cite them more than once on this page). This is an important issue, as it has been repeatedly discussed throughout the Western media, which is not surprising, given that he thinks Israelis belong to the Hylobatidae or Hominidae species.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 23:46, 18 January 2013 (UTC))

These statements have been given much undue weight in this article. Despite being outrageous, they're just statements after all and not actions of any kind. This is something that has plagued Middle Eastern BLPs, whereby huge swathes of information in articles are devoted to controversial statements and often, there's more material on the statements than there is biographical information. Currently it's larger than the actual subsection on Israel and Palestine as well as any other subsection. We should keep the "Descandants of Apes and Pigs" section as brief as possible i.e. one passage, and include it in a separate section named "Controversial statements" or "Controversies." Any other widely covered controversial statements made by Morsi could be included there as well. --Al Ameer son (talk) 07:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I think we follow the RSs. If it is widely covered, we cover it by according it the weight that the RSs accord it. We don't editorialize and insert our own vies by saying "they're just statements", if the RSs think them worthy of heavy coverage -- we follow the RSs. If the RSs cover statements widely, we give it the appropriate weight.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:13, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Heavy coverage in relation to what? These statements are given more space than the dismissal of the heads of the branches of the armed forces, more space than his initial attempt to remove the state prosecutor, more than ... . Compare for example how Jeremiah Wright is treated in Barack Obama. This has been a consistent failing of Wikipedia, "editors" fill BLPs of their ideological foes with whatever crap they can source. They dont consider what a biography is, or even the fact that 2010 came before 2012. nableezy - 15:40, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

As I have pointed out before, these statements were indeed made in 2010, but they did not generate considerable controversy until Morsi became President. Sources that have covered this issue include The Times of Israel, Iran's Press TV, Haaretz, Jerusalem Post, New York Times and the Huffington Post. As for your description of this controversy as "crap", its clear from the numerous sources cited that this issue is not simply fecal matter; it is being taken very seriously, given the importance of Egyptian-Israeli relations. If Morsi had described another ethnic group/nationality as members of the Hominoidea superfamily and/or the Sus genus, they would have been given similar attention. As I have said before, it is quite possible that Morsi has mellowed out in the past two years, and any sources indicating this should certainly be included. Even so, the use of derogatory terms such as these often does generate considerable news (remember the "Macaca" controversy of the 2006 Virginia Senate race) isn't something to be taken lightly.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 00:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC))

Uhh, yeah, news outlets cover news stories. I didnt describe this as crap, that was a general line, though Id probably characterize many of your MEMRI sourced additions spread far and wide as such. I think this deserves one or two sentences, so its not crap.

But back to the point, the move Morsi made in mid-August 2012 in wresting legislative control from the SCAF and dismissing the head of each of the branches of the armed services, an event that actually had some consequence outside of bringing you to this article, is immensely more important than this. But a reader of this article would come away with the impression that most important thing that Mohammed Morsi did was make comments that some find particularly offensive in 2010. Not that he is the first freely elected leader in Egypt's history (going back to the Pharaohs), not that he ended nearly 60 years of military rule, not that he presided over the first constitution that Egypt's citizens freely ratified. No, none of that. What actually matters is that he made some derogatory comments about Jews after watching Gaza be bombarded by "the Jewish state". Im sorry, I forgot where I was for a second. I mistook this is an attempt to write an encyclopedia article about Morsi. Never mind, carry on. nableezy - 02:16, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

If you want to add more material on these issues then go right ahead. I won't stop you.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 03:36, 23 January 2013 (UTC))

Has Morsi Hijacked Democracy?

The page should address this subject in more depth. I think that this article looking at the constitutional referendum is an excellent starting point...

http://www.globalresearch.ca/statistically-examining-cairos-constitutional-referendum-did-morsi-hijack-democracy/5320067

I suggest that everyone take a quick look at it.

Opinion? Debate? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.130.53 (talk) 03:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Repeated removal of "Jews and Zionists" quote

The following is being repeatedly removed from the article:
In January of 2013, MEMRI released an edited video that showed Morsi saying "We must not forget to nurse our children and grandchildren on the hatred" of Jews and Zionists.
I'm sure this is not an attempt at whitewashing. Editors are stating that the information is "redundant." In light of this, there must be some other place where the article reproduces that quote. Or at least some other place where the article states that Morsi wants Egyptian children to be nursed on the hatred of Jews. But I can't find that other place. Help me out here.William Jockusch (talk) 18:12, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

OK, I will assume in good faith that the people who reverted had time to revert, but were then called away on urgent business before they could respond here. But failing any response, it's going back in.William Jockusch (talk) 04:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Not urgent business, just real life and other articles (speaking for myself.) Usually, you should wait at least a full day before expecting a reply. The reverted edits repeated the words "these bloodsuckers who attack the Palestinians, these warmongers, the descendants of apes and pigs" which is already mentioned. Actually, I didn't notice that Hyperionsteel also removed the line that you mentioned when I restored his/her edit, although I fully agree with its removal. If you take a look at the aforementioned thread "Organization", we're currently discussing whether or not the section on these controversial statements should be reduced or not. Feel free to participate. --Al Ameer son (talk) 05:05, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Naglaa Ali Mahmoud

The article gives credit to Naglaa Ali Mahmoud to ask to be called "First Servant" and not "First Lady". This is a lie. I do not mean to insult her, but no Egyptian man believes she is very wise to invent the new title herself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.195.121 (talk) 21:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

New "main article"

There is much information about the protests all over Egypt. The main article should be about the 30 June - July X protests everywhere in Egypt. The info is here. Surfer (talk) 12:41, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

It ends today

he is no longer president81.58.144.30 (talk) 19:17, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

"outsted"

OH GOD SOMEBODY FIX IT 72.241.11.28 (talk) 19:22, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

IT'S FIXED HOORAY 72.241.11.28 (talk) 19:27, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 3 July 2013

"He was ousted by a military coup on 3 July 2013" because it is not considered a military coup, it was enforced by the people, and this is a very sensitive topic 197.36.67.1 (talk) 19:46, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Already done - this language no longer appears in the article. --ElHef (Meep?) 22:42, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

how "official" is the new government?

As with any revolution, there are going to be disputes. Case in point, many Egyptian people are divided on whether their new government is legitimate. Some still consider Morsi to be the president of Egypt, while others (such as the European Union) are already recognizing the new government.

How do Wikipedians decide which government is the "official" one to be listed on the article? --Ixfd64 (talk) 03:43, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 5 July 2013

Dear Wikipedia Family, Please edit the information stated above regarding the last Egyptian revolution (30 June 2013) initiated by the people. Please UNDERSTAND that it was NOT a COUP! 33 million gathered in the streets and more than 24 hours later the army decided to hear them and help the NATION out! DO NOT write our history for us, because make NO MISTAKE history will always have it down RIGHT!

Thank YOU, An Egyptian Citizen 86.195.94.222 (talk) 21:06, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template.. The media is calling it a coup, and Wikipedia goes by what is reported in reliable sources. RudolfRed (talk) 22:10, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 6 July 2013

Morsi's initial telephone call on behalf of freed prisoners From Morsi’s first contact with Al Jazeera at the moment of his release and before his decision to depart prison premises, the call reports: هروب مساجين من سجن وادي النطرون من بينهم محمد مرسي "unknown people broke into the prison after chaos erupted outside the prison in the middle of the night which required four hours of effort by the helpers to break into ward number 3 in prison number 2, where 34 Muslim Brothers were locked up." (The Arabic above reads simply: "Muslims escaped from Wadi al Natroun Prison, among them Mohamed Morsi.")please change "Muslims escaped from Wadi al Natroun Prison, among them Mohamed Morsi.") to " inmates escaped from wadi al Natroun Prison, among them mohamed Morsi." The arabic مساجين means inmates or prisoners rather than Muslims. Kalafiig (talk) 07:30, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Not done: {{edit semi-protected}} is not required for edits to semi-protected, unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. RudolfRed (talk) 17:21, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Transliteration: Morsi vs Mursi

Why is the arabic name transliterated "Morsi" and not "Mursi"? I know that the answer is "because that's how everybody spells it", but I am looking for a deeper reason. --Austrian (talk) 15:38, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

There are different ways to spell Arabic names. It depends on the dialect that you are speaking from. When names get translated from Arabic to English, the nouns get changed around because of the English alphabet. Morsi is how they spell it in Egypt. I hope this helps. I am a new user =} Rlhumphrey13 (talk) 21:56, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Coup / No coup ?

Hi. I was one of the first editors of the opening paragraph after Mursi was removed from power. For a long time, general consensus what that the removal was a military coup, and though I watched the page, I tended to remain neutral. For a period, the article did say it was a coup and now it doesnt. I'm still neutral but i think the introduction (and an unusually long one, at that) should include that there is debate as to whether it is a coup or not. It is certainly significant in the scheme of things. I would have made the changes but its a controversial edit so I thought its best to see what the consensus it. GiggsIsLegend (talk) 15:51, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Current status

What's the current status on Mohamed Morsi? I heard he had been detained, and there was no official information about his whereabouts. Naturally, it has been upsetting his supporters. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 10:48, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Its unlikely any of the editors will be able to answer that. Until there are official (or even unofficial) news, nobody will know.GiggsIsLegend (talk) 15:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I just thought there should be some mention about him being missing. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 20:53, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Presidency succeeded by Ahmedinjad? Seriously?

Am I authorized to delete that immature addidtion under incumbent? 99.6.4.126 (talk) 18:23, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

See below. Evidently this has been going on a long time. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 06:16, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

If someone works for an organization with ties to the Herzliya institute, does that make them a non RS when quoted in the Daily Caller?

I'm asking because a recent edit to the article implied as much in its edit summary. William Jockusch (talk) 23:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

This is a source you think should be used in an encyclopedia article? One that says as a matter of fact that the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood is the destruction of Israel and establishment of an Islamic theocracy from Spain to India? Why should we include a quote by Barry Rubin? nableezy - 00:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

As long as it is made clear that the statements by Barry Rubin are attributed to him, then they can be included here. Contrary to 84.53.97.66's apparent belief, there is no ban on citing individuals who are assoicated with institutes/organizations in Israel, nor are statements by such individuals automatically be considered unreliable. However, there is certainly a question as too whether or not Rubin's statements in the The Daily Caller are notable enough to be included here. I welcome any comments on this issue.(Hyperionsteel (talk) 01:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC))

Why should it be included here? Because a decidedly partisan newspaper saw fit to quote him? So what? This is an encyclopedia article, not a dumping ground for every person who manages to find some website to print their opinion. nableezy - 02:18, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I was pointing out that 84.53.97.66's implicit belief that individuals who are assoicated with Israeli institutes/organizations are automatically be considered unreliable is not valid. Rather, the issue here is whether or not Barry Rubin's statements in the The Daily Caller are notable enough to be included. Of course, taking into account the notability of both Mr. Rubin and the Daily Caller, I can understand why you'd argue that these statements are not notable enough to be included here. (If I was confident that these statements were notable, I'd have already reinserted it.)(Hyperionsteel (talk) 04:11, 17 January 2013 (UTC))

Looking through the cites to the article, "decidedly partisan" does not appear to rule out sources. For example, there are cites to the NYT and the WSJ. By including the quote, my intention was to balance the downplaying by the Morsi and Obama camps. I believe that this type of balancing is needed. However, I am perfectly willing to believe that there is a better quote from the other side of the issue. Additionally, Rubin's claim that Morsi's statements represent a core belief does not appear to be outlandish, in light of other Morsi statements that appear in the NYT article. For example, "“The hatred must go on for God and as a form of worshiping him.” Typically, what one does when worshipping God represents a core belief.William Jockusch (talk) 14:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I really cant make out what it is your saying, and honestly am not interested in your personal analysis on core beliefs. So let me ask the question again. Do you think an "article" that says, as a statement of fact, that the goal of the Muslim Brotherhood is the destruction of Israel and establishment of an Islamic theocracy from Spain to India is "reliable"? Do you think it should be used in an encyclopedia article? nableezy - 15:51, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I subscribe to the curious belief that one should evaluate a claim based on the evidence to support it. So let us look at the evidence. Here we have the head of the MB saying that Zionists are "descendants of apes and pigs", "bloodsuckers", and "vampires". He also said that Egyptian children must “must feed on hatred" for Jews and Zionists and "hatred must continue,” And "“The hatred must go on for God and as a form of worshiping him.” Based on that, it appears that the contention that the MB wants to destroy Israel is credible. As for the Caliphate question, at present I have no evidence on that issue one way or the other.William Jockusch (talk) 23:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

You can subscribe to whatever you like. But Id like you to answer my question. nableezy - 14:59, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

You seem to enjoy demanding that others explain themselves, while refusing to explain any of your reasons for not wanting to include things that the MB has said. You're probably a muzzy yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.111.11.183 (talk) 09:37, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Demands on his children to give up US citizenship

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/07/26/children-of-egypts-muslim-brotherhood-president-wont-give-up-u-s-citizenship-despite-demands/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.130.168.139 (talk) 09:05, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Morsi succeeded by Ahmadinejad!!!

It is wrongly written here in the left-hand section that Mohamed Morsi is succeeded by the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad! Plz fix it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.218.67.253 (talk) 05:34, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Name's not even close. Vandalism? Done. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 06:07, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Its not wrong at all. That part refers to president of the Non-Aligned Movement. It is correct that Ahmadinejad succeeded Morsi as Secretary General of the Non-Aligned Movement. It has nothing to do with the presidency of Egypt. hope that clears things up GiggsIsLegend (talk) 16:00, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

I stand corrected. ZarhanFastfire (talk) 18:49, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Links

[8] and need a section on his trial.[9](Lihaas (talk) 17:18, 4 November 2013 (UTC)).

Unfair Article

The article relies on sources considered by many as being unfair, and not objective, do not sate the complete reality, for example it talks about the constitutional declaration stating that it was for President Morsi protection without mentioning that it was cancelled few days later in response to protests and as a result of a dialogue with political figures and it does not talk about the background of judiciary acts such as dissolving the first fair democartically elected parliament considered by many as being planned for by agreement between Judiciary and Army. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.146.116 (talk) 10:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to add it with sources.(Lihaas (talk) 17:52, 5 November 2013 (UTC)).

Unclear Sentence

"Mohamed Morsi was educated in Egyptian public schools and universities; he was later granted a scholarship from the Egyptian government to prepare for a Ph.D. degree in the United States and failed twice."

The above sentence in the article lead is not very clear. I am assuming that he did not fail the PhD (in any case I don't think that it is possible to fail twice), as everyone refers to him as Dr. Morsi and his work has been published in a reputable journal. Perhaps it is meant that he failed to repay a loan or for some reason had to delay his trip to the States? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.100.21.4 (talk) 12:44, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Trial

His trial is certainly notable enough for its own page. The scope and ramification re also broad enough/.(Lihaas (talk) 19:10, 16 February 2014 (UTC)).

Links

>> Morsi accused of 'Egypt's biggest conspiracy' (Lihaas (talk) 19:10, 16 February 2014 (UTC)).

Birth-date

The birth-date was changed to August 8th by 139.228.218.147 (15 April 2014) with no comment and no source reference. Every source I have found, except for the Saudi Gazette reference, included the McClatchey citation already in the article gives Aug. 20th as his birth-date, as does Britannica. Wiseprincebambi (talk) 03:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Mohamed Morsi. 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:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentid=20130412160973

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:48, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Lede

The lede is more than four paragraphs. There may be too many details, so readers should be given just important events in the intro, including his reign and death sentence. --George Ho (talk) 06:55, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

George Ho is right and, after three years, the text remains confusing and unsatisfactory. In fact, the whole article needs rewriting by a competent editor with knowledge of Egyptian politics. In copyediting the section on Morsi's trial(s), I found that the history peters out in 2016, with no reliable indication of his precise status as of September 2018. Bjenks (talk) 22:54, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

I totally agree the whole article needs to be rewriten SharabSalam (talk) 23:58, 29 January 2019 (UTC)