Talk:Somaliland

Democracy?

This article implies quite strongly that Somaliland (though unrecognized)has become a quite successful democratic state. Regretable, whilst this did seem to be the case a few years ago, this no longer seems so certain:

http://www.unpo.org/content/view/10024/236/ http://www.unpo.org/content/view/10046/236/ http://www.unpo.org/content/view/10095/236/

Somaliland/Somalia on Africa Template

Hello, I'm having a discussion with a couple editors on how best to group Somalia/Somaliland/Somali States on this template here at Template Talk. Input from other editors would, as always, be welcome.RevelationDirect (talk) 11:47, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

POV dispute on this page - One editor keeps reverting Somaliland's de facto independence

This page is not NPOV. It does not accurately reflect Somaliland de facto Independence, which under the Declarative theory of statehood makes a Somaliland a state. Whether it is or not is regardless because we must neutrally reflect these facts and the view point. Outback the koala (talk) 00:37, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Contrary to what has been claimed above, Somaliland is not a de facto independent state under the Declarative theory of statehood nor does self-declared independence ipso facto confer such status. This is all clearly explained here in some detail. Middayexpress (talk) 08:53, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

To pull what you just did, take alook here for a response. Play close attention to the part of Pfainuk's comment at 22:50, 8 January 2010, where he talks about NPOV, as it's most relevant here. I also recommend (in the strongest sense possible) that you to review WP:OWN and think about whether your behavior on this page might fall under this policy. Please do not remove the tag on the page again, I've clearly stated above, I do not think this page is neural. I feel that it fails WP:NPOV. I don't know if I can be any more explicit. We must present the facts from an objective position, not necessarily the Somali gov's position(their position should be included as well, but with fair and equal weight given to both sides). Outback the koala (talk) 04:48, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry pal, but no amount of WP:Wikilawyering on your part will make that "POV" tag you added to the page any more warranted than it actually is. It's also exceedingly difficult to take your claims of "neutrality" seriously when you have already repeatedly attempting to add sentences to various articles suggesting that the Somaliland region of Somalia is a "country" of its own (1, 2). Middayexpress (talk) 07:23, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

De Facto and what it means

Having recently dealt with De Facto and De Jure comparisons in another region, I was invited to comment here. So here we go:

The Montvideo Convention is important, and will certainly go a long way towards ones claim to obtain De Jure independence, but it does not and cannot affect De Facto control. De Facto control simply means that certain group exercises control over a certain region. The group's De Jure claims are irrelevant when it comes to De Facto control. Somaliland is at the very least a De Facto Independent Region. You don't to meet criteria for De Jure recognition, to be De Facto Independent. From what I read, all editors here agree that Somaliland controls 60% of its claimed region. However the claim is for De Jure purposes only, as you are making a legal claim, not a claim in fact, which is silly. You cannot claim that the car is red, when it is in fact blue. HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 06:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Territorial control does not necessarily imply independence. Puntland controls most of its claimed territory (including all of Sanaag, which Somaliland also claims), but it too is just an autonomous region. The Montevideo Convention itself is also actually in practice limited by/dependent on recognition since "an unrecognized territory soon comes to be disregarded as a state under the Convention, because it is seen as lacking the capacity to enter into foreign relations" (1). Middayexpress (talk) 08:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Territorial control by an entity wishing to secede implies De Facto independence. This was exactly the case with the Confederate States of America. Additionally, you wrote this: an unrecognized territory soon comes to be disregarded as a state under the Convention, because it is seen as lacking the capacity to enter into foreign relations and I agree. Now please prove that Somaliland's region, the one under the control of the Isaaq tribe, lacks the capacity to enter into foreign relations. You do not need recognition to have the capacity to enter. Taiwan has no US recognition, and yet there are US-Taiwan relations. In theory (law) there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. Also, can you please show me which control over Somaliland's Isaaq region is exerted by Somalia? HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 11:09, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Independence

Should it not also show Somaliland's independence from at least the United Kingdom, if not Italy and others? Flosssock1 (talk) 21:39, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry Midday express won't allow that and has removed that info from a number of articles. I can't do anything about it. See; WP:OWNERSHIP Outback the koala (talk) 21:53, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually, British Somaliland gained independence from the United Kingdom and Italian Somaliland gained it from Italy. The Somaliland region of Somalia gained it from neither. So much for Outback's WP:Wikilawyering. Middayexpress (talk) 07:17, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

How can it gain independence from neither if it existed and became independent? Don't you mean that it partially gained it from both? HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 11:11, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

I think I understand what is being said, but gaining independence from the Unitied Kingdom and Italy both opened the doors to it's current constitution. I see them as pretty important points which should be included. Flosssock1 (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Flossock and HW007, to be clear on the facts. In the 1960s, British Somaliland and Italian Somaliland each gained independence from their respective parent nations. After only a few days these two countries joined into a union that created Somalia. This allowed the Somaliland government in 1991 to claim that they were, as successors to the independent British Somaliland, dissolving the union with Somalia, thereby creating their own country (which by that time they already had control over). Which is how we are is the present situation, that no state recognizes Somaliland or its actions for that matter, but they still exist in de facto control of the territory free from outside control. That's indeed the entire basis for the Constitution of the state. I'm not sure how to incorporate this into the article however because one editor (Middayexpress) is opposed to anything that might imply that Somaliland is country(something up for debate). If we were neutral, this would be represented, however it is not and there is a neutrality tag on the article as a result. Outback the koala (talk) 16:24, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes I understand you. Could we not state the changes above as changes to the territory? or as unrecognised constitutional changes? Flosssock1 (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Actually Outback, Somaliland is not an independent "country"; it is only legally recognized as a part of Somalia. And before you have the audacity to bring up neutrality again, be sure to take down that template on your user page indicating that "This user recognizes the independence of Somaliland". Middayexpress (talk) 07:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Somaliland was never an independent sovereign country in 1960, several months before the British relinguished their power over the protectorate, a council was held about the territory's future:

In February 1960 a Legislative council was elected by Universal adult male suffrage. On April 6 this council unaninamously passed a resolution stating its desires to recieve independence before 1 july, so that the country could be united with Somalia when it became independent - Encyclopedia Americana pg 251

The whole reason for granting the protectorate independence was a Union with the trusteeship of Southern Somalia, this fact is emphasized in another source:

As there was no plans to grant early Independence to the territory, progress towards self government was slow untill the second half of the fifties. Around that time, however the pace was greatly accelerated chiefly to the growth of nationalist movement and the approaching date of independence in the Trustee ship - The Somali Republic: An Experiment in Legal Intergration pg 4

This also explains why the Flag of Somalia was first hoisted in Hargeisa the capital of the current seccessionist entity, which is not a successor of the protectorate, since it neither controls the same territory nor has the same stable population under it's administration. --Scoobycentric (talk) 19:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

State of Somaliland, here's the page for the country. So when you "Somaliland was never an independent sovereign country in 1960" you are incorrect, as it was independent for 5 days.

Timeline of events;

• 26 Jun 1960 Independence of British Somaliland as State of Somaliland.
• 1 Jul 1960 Unification with Italian Somalia to form Somali Republic.
• 18 May 1991 Secession of former British Somaliland (regions of Awdal,Woqooyi Galbeed, Togdheer, Sanaag and Soolfrom) from Somalia (not internationally recognized).
• 24 May 1991 Republic of Somaliland proclaimed (not internationally recognized).

I hope this might clear some things up. Outback the koala (talk) 05:47, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Nice words there. Too bad they won't be invaliding those quotes above from actual reliable sources anytime soon though. Middayexpress (talk) 07:25, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Koala, thank you for the clarification. That's similar to what I said, i.e. it gained independence from both. Scooby, remember this quote? Somaliland was never an independent sovereign country in 1960, several months before the British relinguished their power over the protectorate, a council was held about the territory's future. So can you please explain to me how a state can vote on a resolution to unify, without ever being independent? Don't you have to be independent to make that call? If several regions are passing a referendum to join together to form a country, doesn't that require them to be independent? HistoricWarrior007 (talk) 08:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

From the CIA:

"Britain withdrew from British Somaliland in 1960 to allow its protectorate to join with Italian Somaliland and form the new nation of Somalia."

Middayexpress (talk) 09:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

So we should state the date of union then? Flosssock1 (talk) 12:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

That information belongs on the Somalia and British Somaliland articles (where it is, incidentally, already cited) since the Somaliland region in question never united with Italian Somaliland to form Somalia. Only the British Somaliland protectorate did (re-read the quote above). The modern-day Somaliland region in northwestern Somalia that this article is about did not even exist until 1991, when it was declared "independent". So as to remove any further confusion, I think I should add at this point that prior to Somalia's independence in 1960, the term "Somaliland" was a generic expression used to denote all of the Somali-inhabited territories in the Horn of Africa. There was thus French Somaliland (modern-day Djibouti), British Somaliland and Italian Somaliland (modern day Somalia), Ethiopian Somaliland (the Ogaden), and Kenyan Somaliland (the Northern Frontier District or NFD). This is why in the colonial literature, for example, one would often read at once about "Hargeisa, Somaliland" or "Mogadishu, Somaliland" or "Merca, Somaliland" or "Kismayo, Somaliland" or even "Harar, Somaliland", etc. None of those expressions have anything to do with the modern-day separatist Somaliland region of Somalia, the latter of whose government actually specifically chose that name in the early 1990's because it claims to be the heir to only one of the old Somali-inhabited territories or "Somalilands" i.e. British Somaliland. Middayexpress (talk) 22:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Added Unbalanced Tag

I've added the unbalanced tag to the article because I believe the article is unbalanced towards the viewpoint of the Somali government over the Somaliland government's views. We need to give an objective viewing of the facts in this case and indeed that means taking the step of treating like other an unrecognized state. I will not elaborate further, as there is a discussion ongoing on this template talk page that is related to this subject, and I do not wish to start another one on this page. Once that discussion completes itself, we will have a better view of where this article stands(or should stand). Outback the koala (talk) 05:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, we got it the first time when you claimed that the article is not "objective". The irony is that the secessionist Somaliland government's "view" is itself hardly objective {at least with regard to its own legal status), and is, in fact, in direct opposition to reality. Wikipedia also has strict rules against advocacy and questionable sources, which prevents any such potential pov-pushing. It has also already been explained to you the irony in talking about "neutrality" when you openly admit on your own user page that "This user recognizes the independence of Somaliland". That other discussion you link to above also pertains to other templates and circumstances, not to this article, so there's no point in attempting to parlay whatever happens there onto here either. Middayexpress (talk) 22:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Do-over of the lead

I'd like to conduct a complete revision of the lead, starting with the proposal below, which I think would assist in balancing out the neutrality of the article, which is clearly in dispute given the number of tags.

Somaliland is a territory located in the Horn of Africa. It is regarded internationally as being an autonomous region of Somalia.* Since 1991, however, it has been governed by a secessionist administration as the Republic of Somaliland,* which is considered a de facto independent state.*

The breakaway republic, which declared its independence in May 1991,* remains unrecognised by any state or international organisation.* However, many foreign governments maintain informal ties with the state, with an increasing number of foreign delegations and embassies having been established in the capital Hargeisa, falling short of full diplomatic recognition.*

Somaliland is bordered by Ethiopia in the south and west, Djibouti in the northwest, the Gulf of Aden in the north, and by the Somalian region of Puntland in the east, covering most of the territory of the former British Somaliland protectorate.*

Astericks (*) represent the placement of citations. If I can't find a credible reference for the statement, I won't add the statement. Any suggestions for ammendments would be welcome. Night w (talk) 05:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good.sephia karta | di mi 00:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Very good. I support this version. Very NPOV, night w. Outback the koala (talk) 06:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Perfect. I think that's completely neutral, fair, and representative of the actual situation. The only part I don't like is "falling short of full diplomatic recognition." Somaliland is way too far from diplomatic recognition to even mention "falling short." I would rather it be "though has no formal diplomatic recognition." Anyway, please make your changes. I back you. (Ejoty (talk) 11:23, 1 February 2010 (UTC))

Thanks everyone! I've made the switch. It should help toward fixing some POV concerns. Night w (talk) 08:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Night w, I made my little change to your lead. If you don't like it, don't worry; I'm not gonna complain. Anyway, I feel like the only part that anyone was in disagreement over was the basic definition of what Somaliland is (which is more or less the lead, as a lead is a little like a definition). I think we should just take the "neutrality" warning down unless anyone thinks another section needs work. (Ejoty (talk) 09:21, 2 February 2010 (UTC))

---

What happened to this lead? I think that the current lead is a bit of a mess. This seems superior to me. The current lead is a long complicated sentence about the current government. The first sentence should be shorter and more general, and then the intro should reference the dispute, as the suggestion above does with "is a territory located in the Horn of Africa." --Bruce Hall (talk) 04:08, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Somaliland is a self-declared state that is internationally recognized as an autonomous region (Federal Member State) of Somalia. The lede asserts this basic fact. Middayexpress (talk) 15:17, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry but judging from the response directly above, I don't think that I made myself clear. I am not arguing about what it should say but how it should say it. The article's current lede I find to be too long and confusing. The lede above I think is superior, which begins "Somaliland is a territory located in the Horn of Africa...." There is a consensus above to use the above lede. Why isn't if the lede of the article. --Bruce Hall (talk) 08:07, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above was from three years ago, when the circumstances on the ground in Somalia were quite different. The country is now a federation and Somaliland, like neighboring Puntland, is internationally recognized as a Federal Member State within the Federal Republic of Somalia (not the Horn of Africa; that would be Somalia itself). Middayexpress (talk) 16:21, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Awdal Separation Movement alleges

This 'movement' doesn't fulfill the condition of being a "large informal groupings of individuals and/or organizations focused on specific political or social issues",its build solely on the "LETTER TO THE SECRETARY GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS", it also to alleges to be "Signed by the people of Awdal Republic." with stating the date and location of the signature, for the sake of objectivity this part should be entirely removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.101.5.233 (talk) 11:43, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Awdalland is a one man show were do you get your sources from?

Puntland only controls the east part of sanaag.

Somaliland was a independent nation for five days even recognize by 34 country´s

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Imbaratore (talk • contribs) 23:11, 8 February 2011

It has been suggested that Roman Catholicism in Somaliland be merged into Roman Catholicism in Somalia

It has been suggested that Roman Catholicism in Somaliland be merged into Roman Catholicism in Somalia. I urge editors to engage in the debate here. Outback the koala (talk) 04:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Motto

Could anybody provide a citation for the motto, please? --125.172.194.176 (talk) 09:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject States With Limited Recognition Proposal

There is a proposal for a Wikiproject at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/States With Limited Recognition. This proposed project would have within it's scope the 10 "Other States" of International Politics and their subpages(significant locations, geography, transportation, culture, history and so on). The project would help to maintain and expand these articles. If you are interested please indicate your support for the proposed project on the above linked page. This page would be within the Project's scope. Outback the koala (talk) 06:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Somaliland was a independent nation for five day´s it was even recognized by 34 country´s

Somaliland was a independent nation for five days even recognized by 34 country´s Awdalland is a one man show were do get your sources from? If I told yo I was Aswanland would you write that to? Puntland only controls east part of sanaag and SSC or PSS(Part of sool and sanaag) their is no cayn at all not historically. What happen to Ingoman? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imbaratore (talk • contribs) 23:18, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

What About a Section on the Pirates of Somaliland?

~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.228.94.207 (talk) 13:00, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The only major port in Somaliland is Berbera and when I there in January I didn't see or hear of any pirates. The Somali pirates operate out of Puntland, not Somaliland.--Brian Dell (talk) 01:13, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

It's free of pirates as far as I know. The Somaliland Navy combats pirates actively, or at least patrol for them. Outback the koala (talk) 03:37, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

"When I was in there in January..." Haha! Rennell435 (talk) 11:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Christians in somaliland

i have delete this section because : 1-there were no Roman Catholic missions of Aden because it was under the English rule and if you dont know English people are evangalance christian s and the only Roman Catholic church is in Italian somaliland where the church is still there . 2-The colonial period did not see some Roman Catholic missionary activity in Somaliland simply because of the treaties that the English wrote with the elders of Isaaq clan in three major languages ,Arabic English, and Somali which said no missionary activity in Somaliland and you can find the treaties in the foreign affairs office of UK,or in SOAS which means the University of London (The School of Oriental and African studies). Bye the way Barghash bin Said of Zanzibar sold Xamar which is the Italian Somaliland in money to the Italians and got payed i WILL get the documents soon . 3-If you dont have any documents at lest use reference that work or do use a feiber please don't edit Gyrofrog or Middayexpress which by the way look like the same person or you will open doors to all the other wanna bees

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 3abdush78 (talk • contribs) 00:09, 24 March 2012 (UTC) 

File:President Siilaanyo of Somaliland.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:President Siilaanyo of Somaliland.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:President Siilaanyo of Somaliland.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 14:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Clean Up

Can someone please volunteer to clean up this article?

The article has many sections without citations as well as sections that have the wrong source.

• [[1]], [[2]], [[3]] or [[4]].

Other sections also require clean up, with random links to pictures inserted in some areas. Including areas such as [[5]]that does not cite sources for the aircraft. No force in Somalia possess air assets. 26oo (talk) 23:49, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Done. Middayexpress (talk) 13:53, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Was Somaliland a former British Protectorate?

Even in its current form, I would say it is a former British Protectorate, putting aside the fact the sessionist government in de facto control sees itself as the continuation of that state. Outback the koala (talk) 05:22, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

The modern-day Somaliland region is not a former British protectorate anymore than the autonomous Puntland region is a former Italian protectorate. That distinction would go to the State of Somaliland (the former British Somaliland), which briefly gained independence from Britain in 1960 before uniting as planned a few days later with the Trust Territory of Somalia (the former Italian Somaliland) to form the Somali Republic (Somalia). By contrast, the present-day Somaliland region was established in 1991, when Isaaq clan-led Somali National Movement (SNM) rebels unilaterally declared independence from the rest of Somalia. That self-declared independence remains internationally unrecognized. The two Woqooyi Galbeed and Togdheer regions that the secessionist government in Somaliland actually controls are still recognized by the international community as regions of Somalia. The remaining northwestern Awdal and northeastern Sool, Sanaag and Cayn (SSC) regions that the separatists also claim as part of the former British Somaliland are disputed with other regional actors (c.f. [6]). This is because those other regions are predominantly inhabited by non-Isaaq clans (namely, the Gadabuursi and Issa in Awdal and the Warsangali and Dhulbahante in SSC), which largely have no interest in the Somaliland project. Many of these clans' leaders did not participate in the SNM's 1991 declaration of an independent Somaliland in Burao, and others that did insist that they were coerced into it by the SNM militia (see, for example, the brief declaration of the Awdal Republic, issued to the UN Secretary General back in the early period of the civil war in 1995 [7]). These non-Isaaq clans also overwhelmingly did not take part in Somaliland's two subsequent referendums for independence (c.f. [8]). Consequently, the peoples of the Awdal and SSC regions have instead sought to form their own autonomous administrations within Somalia, as the federal constitution allows. We thus today have the Awdalland and Khatumo State administrations i.e. the curious phenomenon of secessionist entities within a secessionist entity. So no, Somaliland is not the former British Somaliland any way the situation is objectively examined. Middayexpress (talk) 17:32, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

I disagree wholeheartedly, regardless of who is in current control of the land, the area known as Somaliland, roughly conforms to the area of the former British Somaliland. In the same way I would say that the Southern part of Somalia is a former Italian colonial possession. This has nothing to do with present situation - it is simply a historical fact. This area used to be a British Protectorate. In addition, the Somaliland government recognise this fact and claim some connection to it, there is no reason we should not address this in the article and with this small cat. change. Outback the koala (talk) 20:25, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

The point is, the separatist officials in Somaliland do not control a large portion of the territory of the former British Somaliland protectorate. They just lay claim to the land, just like Puntland and Khatumo State claim parts of said former protectorate as part of their own territory (namely, the SSC regions). The difference is that the Puntland authorities and SSC locals loyal to Khatumo do actually control much of that territory, including Las Khorey ([9]) and the much-disputed Buuhoodle ([10]). The secessionists are mainly limited to their traditional strongholds in Togdheer and Woqooyi Galbeed, which are only a fraction of the former British Somaliland protectorate. By the way, British-administered territories in present-day Somalia included in the early 1940s (just prior to the trusteeship period, which immediately preceded independence) both British and Italian Somaliland as well as the Ogaden, after British troops had fought off and reversed an Italian invasion. Middayexpress (talk) 18:06, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

We don't have another article for the geographic area known as Somaliland other than this one. The fact that its a sovereign state with some claimed area and some controlled should change nothing here. There's no dispute as far as I am aware regarding the connection between Somaliland the geographic area and Somaliland the state. In the same way we have a Taiwan page, even though it has claimed land as well. That situation has parallels this one. I see no reason for us not to treat this page unlike the others in this respect. It should not reflect the region only after 1991. Also a named area can change over time; one example being Poland. In the same way Somaliland's bordered areas as were generally know in the 1940s may not be applicable today. Outback the koala (talk) 22:08, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Somaliland is a self-declared sovereign state, not an actual sovereign state. It is also hardly comparable to Taiwan and the like. Those states actually have some degree of recognition within the international community as sovereign states. The secessionist government in Hargeisa has none to speak of. Globally, it is recognized as a subnational entity within federal Somalia, and is dealt with as such. An example of this basic fact is the fact that the region's self-styled military is subject to the same 1992 arms embargo as the military forces in the rest of Somalia (viz. the Puntland security apparatus and the Somali National Army). An actual sovereign state, on the other hand, is neither dependent on nor subject to any other power or state. Similarly, all of Somaliland's foreign relations are on the same level as those of the autonomous Puntland region i.e. as a subnational entity. So while Ethiopia has a consulate in Hargeisa and Garowe, its actual embassy is in Mogadishu. Thus, although the separatist authorities in Togdheer and Woqooyi Galbeed lay claim to other areas in the former British Somaliland protectorate (and the Warsangali Sultanate prior to that), that claim is not anymore authoritative than those of the other subnational entities also claiming that area. If anything, it carries less weight because the secessionists don't actually control, let alone live in, much of that claimed territory. Middayexpress (talk) 16:19, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

It's usual for articles on modern entities to cover the history of that area. Because of this, a historical category like this would make sense. A more important question is to what articles that category should apply. At the moment, it seems to mostly include pages on the former areas, but also includes a few modern areas like Tonga and Zanzibar. Perhaps more clarity on that categories end would help provide an answer here. CMD (talk) 18:21, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

There indeed appears to be no policy clarifying the matter either way. This is clearly one of several new wiki best practice guidelines that will have to be formulated. Middayexpress (talk) 15:45, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree with both of you, there does not seem to be a clear policy to turn to here. However, Somaliland is a de facto sovereign state, so maybe we could look to emulate the situations on pages of similar states. I also think it makes sense to apply the historical place name with the present day place name. Outback the koala (talk) 02:10, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Somaliland is not a de facto sovereign state because its separatist government in Togdheer and Woqooyi Galbeed is still ultimately subject to Somalia's federal authorities in Mogadishu; both legally and in practice. This basic fact would remain true even if the secessionists did control most of the SSC regions, which they do not. Somalia's arms embargo that they are subject to demonstrates this reality. So does the fact that residents in the region must travel with either the Somali passport or foreign passports since the document that the separatists in Hargeisa have attempted to replace the official Somali passport with is not recognized as valid. For this reason, the Hargeisa media has estimated that 95% of government officials in the region hold a foreign passport ([11]). This lack of recognition is also why 252 remains the country code for telephone numbers in Togdheer and Woqooyi Galbeed, as in the rest of Somalia, and why the Somali federal government-owned .so extension is Somaliland's country code top-level domain (ccTLD) on the internet, like in Puntland and other subnational areas. That said, the new wiki best practice guideline will clearly have to be formulated sooner rather than later. In fact, an entirely new policy solely devoted to secessionist regions/self-declared states should probably be created and agreed to by the wiki community (something along the lines of WP:SELFDEC). Middayexpress (talk) 16:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

How on earth is Somaliland subject to Mogadishu in practice? Most of Mogadishu wasn't even subject to Mogadishu in practice until very recently. There isn't going to be a policy on the application of a single category. For now I say keep it, as it's on Tonga and Zanzibar. It's a category problem, rather than a page problem. CMD (talk) 17:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

The same could be said for Puntland, Somaliland's actual analogue. Both regions are constitutionally federated states of Somalia, and internationally recognized as such. Neither is an autonomous area like Zanzibar (which by definition have special status), let alone a sovereign state like Tonga. The fact remains that the legal and practical limitations imposed on the secessionists in Togdheer and Woqooyi Galbeed (some of which are enumerated above) very much undermine their claims to sovereignty. So does the fact that much of their claimed territory is actually administered by other local actors. So the separatists are at once unrecognized, not fully in control, and bound to the rest of Somalia by a multitude of both domestic and international laws which they have no way of escaping. Hence, the fruitless 20-year quest for recognition. At any rate, there presently may not be a policy on the application of a single category, but there certainly can be such a clause within one clarifying as much. The larger issue of a policy solely devoted to secessionist regions/self-declared states is also a definite possibility. Middayexpress (talk) 20:12, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I see the previous party line of Somaliland being an internationally recognised autonomous area is gone. The details of how they remain unrecognised is quite irrelevant to the application of this category, as is the continued mixing up of de jure and de facto. Outback's argument is that the area was formerly a British protectorate, and at the moment this seems pretty reasonable. CMD (talk) 02:13, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I understand Outback's argument just fine; no need to speak on his behalf. It still doesn't apply, though, since Somaliland is neither de jure nor de facto a sovereign state. It's in every important respect like Puntland, but with far less territorial control. And I clearly referred above to an autonomous area, not an autonomous region. Somaliland is internationally recognized as the latter, definitely not the former. Middayexpress (talk) 15:57, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Somaliland is, as Outback noted, a de facto sovereign state. It doesn't matter that they don't control all their claimed territory; only that they control some. Playing semantics with area vs region is not going to convince anyone of anything. CMD (talk) 18:48, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

A sovereign state is defined as "a state which administers its own government, and is not dependent upon, or subject to, another power" [12]. Somaliland, like Puntland, has its own government. However, both are ultimately subject to the federal government in Mogadishu, so they are treated as subnational entities and consequently bound to the rest of Somalia by all sorts of legal strictures (as shown). Also, an autonomous area is an autonomous section of a country that has special status by law. Somaliland has no legal special status at all. It is constitutionally and internationally recognized as an autonomous region of Somalia or Federal Member State (a federated state), no different than its analogue Puntland. You are welcome to disagree, but these are the facts on the ground. Anyway, the category can stay since there is apparently no policy or clause yet clarifying the matter either way. This guideline situation will probably change in the near future, though. Middayexpress (talk) 17:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Middy...u say Puntland is an "analogue" for Somaliland, but Puntland doesn't assert independence from Somalia while Somaliland does...that's a significant difference, can u explain how u can use Puntland as an analogue? Mirboj (talk) 06:51, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Not sure if this helps, but he BBC in its country profile refers to Somaliland as "The former British protectorate..." and then later says "Somaliland was independent for a few days in 1960, between the end of British colonial rule and its union with the former Italian colony of Somalia. More than 40 years later voters in the territory overwhelmingly backed its self-declared independence in a 2001 referendum." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14115069 --Bruce Hall (talk) 08:28, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Divide the article into two: Somaliland and the Republic of Somaliland

There are two distinct topics here I think. First, there is the territory of Somaliland -- the physical land whose boundaries like all area boundaries are not perfectly clear that has been ruled by a variety of governments over the centuries. Second, there is the Republic of Somaliland -- a government/political organization. There are for instance separate articles about the United States and the United States Government, or better, Europe and the European Union. Should this article therefore be split in two? One can talk about the historic, if not definitively defined, area of Somaliland, and another about the Republic of Somaliland. In the latter would be included boundary disputes, foreign relations, and the controversy about recognition and whether it is a successor to British Somaliland. Thoughts? --Bruce Hall (talk) 08:17, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Natural Resources

Hi Guys! I want to add this section to Somaliland page. I found two articles about the natural resources of Somaliland. --Haibah (talk) 09:42, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

http://somalilandpress.com/somaliland-exports-important-minerals-to-europe-first-time-over-20-years-22910 http://www.unpo.org/article/12867

Hi. The natural resources can be mentioned, but without the secessionist rhetoric (both blog & org are advocacy links). Middayexpress (talk) 15:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

The Natural sources section,I will be careful with sources but what about these other ones.

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7935139.stm

http://ae-africa.com/read_article.php?NID=4620

http://www.mbali.info/doc197.htm --Haibah (talk) 09:32, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

That's alright, as long as the non-advo policy above is observed in the phrasing as well. Middayexpress (talk) 13:10, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

As explained, the first link is a partisan blog; the other link is dead. Both were also redacted non-neutrally, with secessionist rhetoric, contra the WP:NOTADVOCATE policy. Middayexpress (talk) 14:25, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

National Geographic 2012 map

FYI and FWIW: National Geographic's 2012 world map shows Somaliland as a separate country, i.e. it is shaded with a different color from the rest of Somalia. (Puntland is indicated in the same capital-letter typeface, but is the same color as the southern part of Somalia.) By contrast, Darfur is marked with capital letters but the same color as the rest of Sudan; Taiwan is the same color as the rest of China, but with a note indicating its disputed status. I certainly wouldn't suggest that the Nat'l Geo map is any sort of de jure indicator, though it certainly makes a strong impression about the de facto situation on the ground. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:59, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

The secessionist Somaliland administration in Hargeisa de facto controls Woqooyi Galbeed and Togdheer i.e. where the government's Isaaq majority actually live. Awdal and Sool, Sanaag and Cayn (SSC) are disputed with, on the one hand, Awdalland, and on the other hand, Khatumo State and Puntland. This is the reality on the ground regardless of what one map indicates. And for that one map, there are exponentially more ones that show Somaliland as an ordinary autonomous region of Somalia [13], which it certainly is and has always been in terms of international law. Middayexpress (talk) 16:13, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Understood, just that until now I wasn't aware of any current maps depicting a separate Somaliland. - Gyrofrog (talk) 18:42, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Unrecognized, but recognized

Hi, I don't know anything about the article's subject. The lead is confusing as it says simultaneously that the state is unrecognized and recognized.

Somaliland ... is an unrecognised self-declared de facto sovereign state that is internationally recognised as an autonomous region of Somalia.

Can this please be clarified for casual readers who are unfamiliar with the nuances of national recognition? Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, "unrecognized" was superfluous since it's explained a few words later that it is internationally recognised as an autonomous region of Somalia. Middayexpress (talk) 18:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Middayexpress Much obliged, thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

No prob. Middayexpress (talk) 19:55, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Demonym

A few minutes after reverting an anonymous ip vandal, a user changed a link making the "Somali" demonym point to the Somali people page. This is an error because the latter page is reserved for the Somali ethnic group alone -- one of many ethnic groups in Somalia with Somali nationality. I've corrected the link to point to the demographics of Somalia page. Also have a look at the CIA factbook for the difference between the Somali ethnicity [14] versus the Somali/Somalian demonym [15]. Middayexpress (talk) 20:50, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Theyuusuf143, can you please come to the talk page? AcidSnow (talk) 14:46, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Recognised as what?

It's absurd to say that "Somaliland is a self-declared independent state that is internationally recognised as an autonomous region of Somalia." An independent country is either recognised or it's not. It can't be "recognised" as not being independent. This article is not about the autonomous region of Somalia called Somaliland. It is about the self-declared independent state of Somaliland. The correct formulation is "Somaliland is a self-declared independent state that is not internationally recognised." Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 03:40, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

This page is on the autonomous region in northwestern Somalia, and is categorized as such too [16]. That said, the phrase "Somaliland is a self-declared independent state that is not internationally recognised" is both vague and an understatement. This is because it does not specify what exactly Somaliland is not internationally recognized as being and by whom. On the other hand, the phrase "Somaliland is a self-declared independent state that is internationally recognised as an autonomous region of Somalia" both specifies and links to Somaliland's actual legal status i.e. as an autonomous region/federal state of the Federal Republic of Somalia. That is how it is internationally recognized. More importantly, in international law, the enclave lies within Somalia's legal borders, its territorial waters are within Somalia's territorial waters, and its airspace is likewise within Somalia's airspace. Middayexpress (talk) 16:59, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

In that case, the lead sentence should be: "Somaliland is a region of northern Somalia, corresponding to the former territory of British Somaliland. Legally, it is an autonomous region of Somalia and is recognised as such internationally. In practice, most of the region has been under the control of the Republic of Somaliland, a self-proclaimed independent state, since 1991." Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 07:36, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

That's pretty accurate, except for the last sentence. It is factually incorrect to claim that the separatist Somaliland administration in Hargeisa controls most of the territory of the former British Somaliland protectorate. Much of the eastern Sool, Sanaag and Cayn provinces are actually disputed with two other regional administrations, Puntland and Khatumo State. Many of the residents in these regions were also part of the former British Somaliland protectorate, but unlike supporters of the Somaliland polity (which regards itself as the only legitimate heir to British Somaliland), they don't recognize the authority of the Hargeisa government over their traditional territory. They also generally belong to different clans [17]. Middayexpress (talk) 14:24, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

How about "much of the region"? Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 14:42, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

That's too vague, as it doesn't indicate what actual areas the Hargeisa-based administration controls. It's also complicated by the fact that Somaliland troops often invade Khatumo areas only to withdraw shortly afterwards, such as at Taleh. What's wrong with "Somaliland is a self-declared independent state that is internationally recognised as an autonomous region of Somalia"? Middayexpress (talk) 14:53, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

First, it's a totally illogical sentence, as I said above. If Somaliland is a state, it's either recognised or it's not. It (the state) can't be recognised as being something else. Second, it contradicts what you said before, which is that this article is about the region of Somaliland, not the Republic of Somaliland. If that is so, the opening sentence must begin, "Somaliland is a region..." The opening sentence needs to say that Somaliland is a region which is recognised as one thing (a region of Somalia) but which is de facto something else (an independent state). Your only real objection to my sentence seems to be a quibble about how much of the Somaliland region is controlled by the Republic of Somaliland. I have suggested "most of" and "much of", both of which you object to. What is your suggestion? Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 09:28, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, not quite. The paragraph above condenses into three sentences what is more accurately explained over several paragraphs. Specifically, it omits the fact that it's "the government of Somaliland [who] regards itself as the successor state to the British Somaliland protectorate" and that since 1991, "the territory has been governed by an administration that seeks self-determination as the Republic of Somaliland." Another problem is that "Republic of Somaliland" is just what the secessionist government in Hargeisa calls the region. That's not actually its legal name. In terms of both international law and global recognition by the Somali federal government and international community, the enclave is simply "Somaliland" and it is legally an autonomous region of the Federal Republic of Somalia. The Hargeisa government has itself acknowledged as much, with its leader President Ahmed Mohamed Mohamoud conceding that "Somaliland is still treated officially by international organisations as an autonomous region of Somalia" [18]. That "Somaliland is a self-declared independent state that is internationally recognised as an autonomous region of Somalia" is thus certainly factually accurate. If the phrase has a flaw, it's that it is perhaps a little long-winded. A possible, close alternative is that "Somaliland is a non-recognized self declared state that is internationally classified as an autonomous region of Somalia" [19]. Middayexpress (talk) 17:44, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

OK, I have now concluded that you're just making difficulties for the sake of it, presumably for some political motive that doesn't interest me. I'm going to rewrite the opening paragraph on the lines I have suggested. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 06:04, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

I've restored the longstanding intro. The WP:BURDEN is on you the user seeking to make the change to try and first obtain consensus for it. This has not been done. Middayexpress (talk) 15:13, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

I am responding to a third opinion request for this page. I have made no previous edits on Somaliland and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes.

It seems to me that there is no logical contradiction about what is "self-declared" and what is "internationally recognized". If Intelligent Mr Toad feels that this is self-contradictory, there was a separate formulation which was mostly agreed by Middayexpress to be accurate, except for the last part. Perhaps more discussion on that formulation, or other formulations can lead to a mutually agreeable lead. Kingsindian (talk) 05:39, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks; that's what I figured. Middayexpress (talk) 16:30, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't care sufficiently about this article to waste further time arguing about it with idiots. Wikipedia is full of inferior content because of the rule that "stubborn idiots always win." This can stand as another example. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 04:46, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits

Alifazal, there was already a consensus for this. AcidSnow (talk) 02:18, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

@AcidSnow: Hi. As far as I'm aware, the discussion at Talk:Hargeisa#Image_dispute hasn't yet been officially closed. Besides, a consensus seemed to have developed for the full image. I'll ask you again: What is wrong with adding the image in the article? The emblem already appears in the infobox; why insist on using it twice? Eid al Hajj Mubarak! Ali Fazal (talk) 02:24, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

The consensus on the Hargeisa page was indeed for the full monument. There is none for it here or on the Siad Barre or the Mohammed Said Hersi Morgan pages, much less for the side-mural on the flag of Somaliland page. Middayexpress (talk) 16:16, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I have added the full image of the landmark memorial. Surely, i don't need to gain consensus in order to remove a duplicate image of the emblem which already appears in the infobox. @AcidSnow:, might i suggest you read this Wikipedia:Systemic bias. Ali Fazal (talk) 15:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

I was never referring to the emblem but you obviously knew that. AcidSnow (talk) 16:04, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

I know. What I meant that your revert added the image of the emblem over the image that i replaced it with. And now you replace the emblem with with an image of the speaker? Might i ask as to the reason of your opposition to the landmark image? Also, you said that you'd answer the next day over my COI allegation but unfortunately, that request of mine was not heeded to. Therefore, i'd like to ask you to state if you have any potential COI with regards to Somaliland. I understand you are a member of Wikiproject Somalia. Ali Fazal (talk) 16:10, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

It was quite pointless for me to respond to it which even the admin stated as well. Your accusations and statements were entirely double edge blades. As the admin already stated:

"The user you accuse of having done a disruptive act was being at most no more disruptive to yourself; reverting questionable additions (and this addition was questionable; at the very least, the text you were putting in looked POVy, and the source page you point to -- actually, apparently, a back cover, says nothing about innocent civilians or indiscriminate bombardment) is part of the process, not a disruption to it. If you want to discuss the content and whether it belongs on the article, please take it to the article's talk page.".

And:

"This is not the board to come to because you're not happy with having your edits reverted. This is a board to come to when you have actual evidence of a conflict of interest problem. You have none. Please take discussion of content to the Talk page of the article."

So I am encouraging you to remain on the talk page. And no I am not a member of the Somalia Project. AcidSnow (talk) 16:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for reiterating the facts and do excuse me for assuming that you were a member of WP:Somalia - my bad. As for the COI; i urge you to put yourself in my position - if someone insists on removing a landmark image related to a place - without citing any cogent reason(s) - what would you expect? You still haven't answered my question above as to why are you opposed to the image of the memorial?

I'll also bear in mind, next time not to take your word for granted as you did say that you'd respond to the "nonsense" the next day and i was eagerly waiting for it but you have instead used the other user's argument. I still believe, for the avoidance of any future doubt, that you have a potential COI with regards to Somaliland given your insistence on removing this image without a rationale. The onus is on you to disprove my allegation by declaring on this talkpage that you do not have any COI with regards to writing articles related to Somaliland from a Somalia POV. Ali Fazal (talk) 16:45, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Well, it looks like Alifazal/User:No More Mogadishu has been blocked again. Middayexpress (talk) 19:37, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Two clarifications:

• I am the user being quoted above, but I am not, as someone has referred to me above, an admin.
• No, there is no onus on AcidSnow to disprove any allegation of COI. A simple editing disagreement is not evidence of a COI. You tried taking that to the Conflict Of Interest noticeboard and got no traction, because you had no actual evidence of a COI. In Wikipedia terms, a COI involves more than just an editorial disagreement.

--Nat Gertler (talk) 03:06, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Administrative divisions

I removed a table in which Somaliland was said to have 'States'. It hasn't, and the table had no references or footnotes to prove otherwise. Somaliland has Regions and Districts. See Article 109.1 of the constitution, which reads: "The territory of the Republic of Somaliland shall consist of regions, and each region shall be divided into districts." Of course there's "Khatumo State" and their was once an initiative to create "Awdal state" but these are breakaway tentatives that do not form part of Somalilands' formal administrative structure. As an example of the creation of a District (Gudmo Biyo-cas in Sanaag Region) in I refer to Presidential Decree "XEER MADAXWEYNE Lr: 399/052014" of 21 May 2014 published in the Somaliland Republic Official Gazette of May 2014, page 169, here. If someone shows me a similar source or reference referring to the creation of 'States' in Somaliland, then of course I'd be happy to see the table returned in the article. Loranchet (talk) 16:23, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

June

The article doesn't mention British Somaliland becoming independent on 26 June 1960, let alone does it mention the supposed "State of Somaliland. It does, however, mention that British Somaliland became independent "during the summer of 1960". Hence -> 1st July 1960. So I am encouraging you Hadraa to do a self-revert. AcidSnow (talk) 22:55, 16 March 2015 (UTC) if you are blind thay is your proplem the article which mention British Somaliland becoming independent on 26 June 1960 is the neywork times....... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadraa (talk • contribs) 22:58, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Nah, it doesn't say that. But the rest of it does seems to have been taken off Wikipedia. If you took the time to actually research this subject you would know that it's highly inaccurate. AcidSnow (talk) 23:09, 16 March 2015‎

IT HURTS TO BE TRUE DOESNT IT NAH.........Somaliland Marks Independence After 73 Years of British Rule — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadraa (talk • contribs) 01:45, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

What? Also, please see Talk:British Somaliland. AcidSnow (talk) 02:19, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Instead of edit waring please see the discussion on there. AcidSnow (talk) 02:31, 18 March 2015

It's already been established that there never was a "State of Somaliland". AcidSnow (talk) 02:37, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Also can you please stop shouting at me. AcidSnow (talk) 02:42, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

The Independence of Somaliland on 25 June, 1960

Its Fact that Somaliand gained Independence from the Britsh rule on 25 June, 1960 which is five days 5 DAYS before the independence of the Trust Territory of Somaliland which was ruled by Italy and the UN ..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadraa (talk • contribs) 01:58, 18 March 2015 (UTC) AcidSnow use the talk page and has i said there are two diffrent soures on the matter of the independance of Somaliland — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadraa (talk • contribs) 02:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC) Actual Reliable Sources

1_https://books.google.se/books?id=t1xKAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA295&lpg=PA295&dq=Somaliland+is+granted+independence+by+British+government&source=bl&ots=9wPwvhw70t&sig=tEzDd83wSGu0TZ7qcg0-zccID2s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=vdwIVaC-CNjiasXUguAP&ved=0CD4Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=Somaliland%20is%20granted%20independence%20by%20British%20government&f=false.

2_http://www.sahistory.org.za/dated-event/somaliland-granted-independence-british-government.

plus http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9F00E1DA123EEF3ABC4E51DFB066838B679EDE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadraa (talk • contribs) 02:46, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

You appear to be confusing the state of Somaliland (former British Somaliland) with the present-day Somaliland enclave. The state of Somaliland was the former British Somaliland protectorate in the five-day transition period when the British authorities on 26 June 1960 granted British Somaliland independence to form a union with the Trust Territory of Somaliland (former Italian Somaliland). This scheduled union between the two Somalilands (the former British Somaliland and the Trust Territory of Somaliland) took place on July 1, 1960, forming the Somali Republic (Somalia). For this reason, this latter date is also Somalia's Independence Day. On the other hand, the present-day Somaliland enclave was established on May 18, 1991, after Somali National Movement leaders declared a new territory in northwestern Somalia. For this reason, this latter date is also when the Somaliland government celebrates the enclave's establishment. From the U.S. government's Code of Federal Regulations, Proclamation 3772 (1964): "the Somali Republic came into existence on July 1, 1960, by the union of the former Italian Trust Territory of Somaliland and the former British Somaliland" [20]). Middayexpress (talk) 15:49, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

hi Middayexpress iam not confusing the state of somaliland which by the way was and is not (former British Somaliland) because it was a free country that lived for five days had an election in may of 1960 and had a constitution and a government and a police and military force and was duly recognized as a sovereign entity by 35 nations or countries before voluntarily joining (the former UN Trust Territory of Somalia that was a former Italian colony) and establishing the (Somali Republic ) in July 1960 . and the present-day Somaliland self declared country was established on May 18, 1991 on the grounds of the former state of Somaliland which was real.thanks and cheers hope to see you tonight . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadraa (talk • contribs) 12:40, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Hadraa. There's no question that British Somaliland was granted independence on June 26, 1960. However, the territory was granted independence specifically to unite with the Trust Territory of Somaliland, and after prior consultations between representatives from both territories. This is why the parliament unanimously approved the union of the two territories only 24 hours later ("Representatives of British Somaliland and the Trust Territory of Somalia met in April and agreed on a merger of the two territories in an independent republic. British Somaliland was granted independence on 26 June 1960, and the merger received unanimous approval by the legislature on the following day." [21]). The union itself was effectuated five days later, on July 1, 1960, thereby establishing the Somali Republic (Somalia). Middayexpress (talk) 18:55, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Middayexpress the things you are saying is true but it all happened after 1 july try and understand me i gave clear statments by two driffrent scholars who all simply say that after the independence of the former British Somaliland it was called the State of Somaliland . if what you say is true why did the UN and 35 countries recognized her incloudind IsraelHe cited Israel was the first state to recognize Somaliland in 1960 when it received its independence from Great Britain. cheers — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadraa (talk • contribs) 19:21, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I am unable to find any British source for June 26, let alone independence. The British has already concluded in 1949 (11 years earlier) that all the Somalilands would form one nation. More importantly, the claims of 34 nations and "State of Somaliland" all come after 1991. So we can a guess why the suddenly appear after. AcidSnow (talk) 19:01, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Hadraa, parliament approved the union of the two territories on June 27, not July 1. That was only around 24 hours after British Somaliland was granted independence. There doesn't appear to be any official legislation confirming that 35 countries recognized a sovereign State of Somaliland. It wouldn't really make sense if they did since the Somali representatives from both sides had already agreed beforehand in February and then again in April on an early union of the two territories ("Fresh elections, for a new legislative council, were held in February 1960, with all parties in favour of early independence and the unification of all Somali territories" [22]). Middayexpress (talk) 19:55, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

LOL, that UNPO article is from SomalilandPress. Israel coundt give a rats tail about British Somaliland. More importantly, it's a historical fact that nobody recgonized this supposed "State of Somaliland". AcidSnow (talk) 19:35, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

The UNPO is the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization, an advocacy group. Middayexpress (talk) 19:55, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

It is itself as well lol. Also, it's was agreed even as far back as 1949 (conference between Italy, Britain, and France on the date of Somalia) when the British proposed that they should have control of all the Somalilands and then let then form one nation. AcidSnow (talk) 19:58, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

read this

"TWENTY ONE YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE WITHOUT RECOGNITION":REPUBLIC OF SOMALILAND "On June 26, 1960, Somalilandgained independence from the British. At that time, she was recognised immediately by 35

countries “including the five permanent members of the Security Council” before she decided

to form a union with the south 5 days later (Jhazbhay, 2003; Nur, 2011:4)."

— TAHEERA MAARIF Durham University, School of Government and International Affairs, Graduate Student.Research Interests: African Studies, African Diaspora Studies, and African, [[23]]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadraa (talk • contribs) 19:46, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

What? As you looking for the Italian parliament or something else? AcidSnow (talk) 20:04, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Iqbal Jhazbhay is a separatist advocate as well [24]. As I wrote, there indeed doesn't appear to be any official legislation confirming that 35 countries recognized a sovereign State of Somaliland. Middayexpress (talk) 20:10, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

then are Peter J. Schraeder and Alison K. Eggers are they separatist advocate to,,, Hadraa (talk) 20:16, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure who they are, actually. "Official legislation" means actual legislation from some government entity. To this end, the U.S. government's Code of Federal Regulations, Proclamation 3772 (1964) notes that "the Somali Republic came into existence on July 1, 1960, by the union of the former Italian Trust Territory of Somaliland and the former British Somaliland" [[25]]. Middayexpress (talk) 20:35, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

the somali Republic not the State of Somaliland. answer the newyork artical. and they are fair scholars.Hadraa (talk) 20:49, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

That piece is on the independence of British Somaliland (which as you know was often shortend to "Somaliland", and was just one of the various "Somalilands"), not the "State of Somaliland". This is also a legal matter, so actual legislation is required to substantiate it. Middayexpress (talk) 21:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

answer on talk state of somaliland page cant jump all day from two diffrent talk pages,Hadraa (talk) 21:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Ok, good idea. Middayexpress (talk) 21:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Map

Please come to the talk page User:Hadraa instead of making baseless accusations. AcidSnow (talk) 23:44, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

What is baseless accusations the map is yours and like i said based on clan division which is in Somalia not in Somaliland.Hadraa (talk) 23:53, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

P.S if you think that making autonomous regions based on clans which you have done with all the other Somali regions like puntland and ex good for you. stop vandalising SomalilandHadraa (talk) 23:56, 25 May 2015 (UTC)