This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
The Global March pdf is a dead link. The sentence on girl soldiers isn't clear so I wanted to verify the correct information at the original source, but I'm not able to. Does anyone have the pdf or another source on those numbers? —Zujine|talk14:13, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If it fails verification, it should simply be removed in my opinion along with the information that is being sourced by it. Anything that does not have verification should not be here. Mar4d (talk) 14:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the proposal was not moved. There really hasn't been any discussion of new names for these articles, and the discussion has gone stale. --BDD (talk) 18:50, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Greg, I'm not seeing the problem with the current titles....sure, some of them need better sourcing and better prose, but that is hardly an issue with the names. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:36, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Vanamonde93Human3015. My only thought here is that some articles present ".. abuses ..", some present ".. violations .." (possibly a better term?), some merely present "Human rights in..". There doesn't seem to me any great rhyme or reason for any cut off. I am unsure about "Human rights abuses in the Vietnamese cashew industry" particularly in relation to other articles. Here there is shocking exploitation of workers but there is ethnic cleansing in, for instance, Iraq and Syria. Maybe other articles need to be categorised in similar ways.
I am not well versed in the Northeast India articles; I was drawn here by the Chile article, which is on my watchlist. I dislike the word "issue" in the title, because it is rather weaselly, and "violations" is IMO much better than "abuses" (If you think about it, nobody can abuse my rights, only I can do so....) I have no opinions as to the merger. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:14, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think that violations is more specific, quantifiable and manageable than abuses. I was surprised to find that, all in all, I think Ngrams supports the terminology "Human rights violations ..." GregKaye06:22, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.