Content deleted Content added
m Signing comment by 2606:6000:C30D:3500:3DD7:8311:A78B:34A8 - "" |
m Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Merge {{VA}} into {{WPBS}}. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "C" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Human rights}}, {{WikiProject Politics}}. |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=mid|libertarianism=yes|libertarianism-importance=high}}
}}
What about the [[Caribbean Community]]? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2606:6000:C30D:3500:3DD7:8311:A78B:34A8|2606:6000:C30D:3500:3DD7:8311:A78B:34A8]] ([[User talk:2606:6000:C30D:3500:3DD7:8311:A78B:34A8#top|talk]]) 08:20, 26 July 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
Why is Taiwan not on here? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/114.34.179.96|114.34.179.96]] ([[User talk:114.34.179.96#top|talk]]) 08:57, 26 November 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
▲{{WikiProject Human rights|class=C|importance=high}}
▲{{WikiProject Politics|class=C|importance=mid}}
== Peer Review of Initial Contribution ==
Line 67 ⟶ 68:
== new sections ==
New sections on Burma and Syria added. They're cited to the appropriate laws, however, since these nations are highly criticized for repressive regimes, they're also necessarily critical of restrictions on freedom of movement in said countries. All claims are referenced AFAICT. Anyone have any problems with the way the are? I could probably write a whole new page on the Syria freedom of movement laws, but decided to restrict it to the most relevant topics. [[User:Swatjester|<
== by country/by region ==
It should probably go back to by country. The EU section would apply to all EU member states. [[User:Swatjester|<
== Disambiguation ==
Line 98 ⟶ 99:
== Topic of this article ==
The topic of this article is very vague and it needs to be clarified. The lead states that it is about Article 13 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights, but the rest of the article has elements ranging from Emepror Augustus to "Scholars Argued". Is anyone still watching this article? I am rather tempted to quickly stub it into something coherent. [[user:Heptor | <
I think the title "freedom of movement" should be retained under its own Wikipedia entry. This is too important a concept to make it a subsection of something else (if that's what's being proposed). Making it clear upfront that the article is not just about Article 13 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights would be good though.
Line 106 ⟶ 107:
If anything it needs to be expanded. The lede certainly could be updated to reflect the current content but stubbing it is not appropriate. The concept is complex and there are different interpretations according to time and locale. Those viewpoints should be expanded not removed. [[User:Jadeslair|Jadeslair]] ([[User talk:Jadeslair|talk]]) 15:43, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Well, please expand and update it sooner rather than later. Right now it is all [[WP:OR|Original Research]], and rather frivolous at that. The lede makes a claim that there is a concept within "Human rights" that can be referred to -- interchangably it seems -- as a Freedom of movement, mobility rights or as the right to travel. Then it claims that this right/freedom/concept is "expressed" in the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]]. And then it dumps the raw text of Article 13, for no apparent reason other than to function as a filler. I don't see much that is worth saving here. [[user:Heptor | <
* We don't withdraw from important topics merely because they are broad and abstract, and therefore difficult to write about. We move forward with improving them. "Freedom of movement" gets over one hundred thousand Google Books hits, and "right to travel" gets over eighty thousand, so there are plenty of sources to work with. [[User:BD2412|<span style="background:gold">'''''bd2412'''''</span>]] [[User talk:BD2412|'''T''']] 01:13, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Pardon the sarcasm, but most scholars argue that it is far better to publish nothing at all than to publish something of rubbish quality. Especially when that something is wrong and misleading. That being said, I think the lede has been improved significantly, and it is actually quite good now. Many thanks to BD2412 and Jadeslair. [[user:Heptor | <
== External links modified ==
| |||