Talk:Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Foreign relations of Saudi Arabia article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Saudi Arabia Portal This article is part of WikiProject Saudi Arabia, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Saudi Arabia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, an attempt to provide information in a consistent format for articles about international organizations, diplomats, international meetings, and relations between states. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.

This article as is sounds like a press release from the saudi embassy. It's all sugar and spice. Klonimus 07:55, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

I disagree. The first paragraph is somewhat complimentary but the rest doesn't come across as very pro- saudi. Have you got any specific examples of how it is 'sugar and spice'? Entsuropi 18:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I also disagree with Klonimus. It doesnt sound like that to me...They just say many facts about Saudi Arabia...there is no problem with that... Invader05 01:57, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Very "sugar & spice..." 2 i am changing 3 Sugar and Spice 4 Human Rights

[edit] Very "sugar & spice..."

Foreign relations history with the US needed to be expanded as a bridge to the current status of US/KSA relations. Oil and Islam were major influences and warrants the recently added facts.

[edit] i am changing

some idiot connected a saudi letter and 9/11. Seems prrpaganda and some dumb conspiracy theorists idea. I am deleting it —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Uch (talk • contribs) 14:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Sugar and Spice

Fact is, Wikipedia is not the place to give your biased opinions on things. It's a place for verifiable facts, and facts alone.

[edit] Human Rights

The Human Rights section needs some citations etc, refs to Amnesty Int etc. At the moment it looks like someones rant. I have removed the following line from the article and put it here for the time being.

Many prominent members of society have gotten away scot-free for crimes that deserve punishment helped by a judicial system having no transparency.

If anyone wants to put it back please remember "Wikipedia:Verifiability is one of Wikipedia's core content policies. The others include Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Jointly, these policies determine the type and quality of material that is acceptable in Wikipedia articles." Sean.hoyland (talk) 09:05, 22 December 2007 (UTC)