Portal talk:Human rights

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Human rights (Rated NA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia.
 NA  Quality: rating not applicable
 Top  Importance: Top
 

Corresponding Portal at Wikisource[edit]

As there are papers relating to human rights scattered through English Wikisource, I have started a corresponding s:Portal:Human rights, and started the collation. To point out that Wikisouce can host public domain works in their entirety, which make them readily available to cross-link to Wikipedia. Plus if the document is available as a scan, preferably djvu format, though pdf is okay, then they can be loaded to Commons, and we can extract available text layers. billinghurst sDrewth 23:56, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

my story[edit]

I live in Massachusetts, and have had no privacy, and have been subjected to intense verbal abuse by some guy on a scanner that is intrusive and controlling as well, and being a woman and alone, it has been excrutiating. This is due to their belief that I miraculously survived (have supernatural powers or help) an attempt on my life years ago in this area. It's like I'm another Bin Laden. And I can't get anyone to take me seriously. They've convinced people that I'm 'schizophrenic' and that it's my 'mental illness'. I do live on disability but only because I am constantly fending things like this off, along with mistreatment by landlords, and some youth in the area. I'm too tired to 'create an account' here right now (it's complicated doing that), but I don't want to miss out on anyone helping me with this. They are also going on exaggerated claims of abuse from these youth about 2-3 incidents that happened years ago when I was in shelters/transitional housing, but they won't let me tell them what happened, so they can just pursue this. They can read your mind, and then they say this over a radio or cellphone (the youth do that-reporting on my whereabouts when I'm in public when they see me). I've really felt that they are an omnipresence. I've been helped by Wiki Encyclopedia for touching on these subjects. It's the only thing that's kept me going. Don't let them get you to stop (you'd be cutting off desperate people who have nobody and nothing to help them). Thank you, and please try to get oversight for prisons ("Orange Is the New Black"- a book written by a woman who was in prison, and described the feeling I'm having), and check out the P.O.V.special on a group of female prisoners lawsuit against Framingham, MA women's prison, for their having had male guards watching them [even in the shower!], which ultimately caused this group to come down with various forms of cancer.24.61.42.158 (talk) 02:12, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

[edit]

Following massive official logo campaign, i have removed several different images that this wikiproject and portal used with official winner of the world contest. --WhiteWriter speaks 00:26, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

"The world contest"? What world contest? A contest somebody made up some day? Is this a logo that the United Nations uses to represent human rights? By what standard is this notable enough to be stuck on every wikipedia human rights page and template like you have been? If I were to host a "world" contest for people to design a human rights logo, why shouldn't my winner go up on every page instead of this? What makes this one special? --Pfhorrest (talk) 06:25, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Addendum: I found A Logo for Human Rights thanks to your edit history. NB that it is extensively flagged for notability, lack of sourcing, conflicts of interest, etc. --Pfhorrest (talk) 06:39, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Well, i find it very simple. Several (if not only one, i afraid) editors agreed to use hand of American Statue of Liberty as symbol of Human Rights. And on this website, from over 15,000 (politically and visually neutral) submission from more than 190 countries, more then 100.000 people voted, and fantastic international jury for new logo for human right, per numerous valid specifications. It is the same principle we use in wikipeida. At the end, there are no manual that tells us that we must use American symbol as universal symbol for Human Rights, so, therefor, we should give a chance to the symbol that will (quite sure) be in vast international use. Also, we had several different symbols on wikipedia, so we can finally have only one. I also added international sources for the competition. If you have any proposition, i am eager to hear it! :) All best! --WhiteWriter speaks 10:22, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
The statue of liberty torch is being used for internal wikiproject purposes; it is NOT being put forth as the "official" human rights logo, as if there could be such a thing. Besides, that is a non-sequitur: I am not arguing that we should be using the torch even for internal purposes, I don't care about that, if need be this wikiproject can go without a logo if the torch is unacceptable. (Though for what it's worth, the statue of liberty is not exclusively or even originally American; the Liberty image used in the statue is European in origin, the French actually built the statue now standing in New York, and they have a matching one of their own, too, still in France).
My point is that just because someone had a big contest which you think was well done and democratic etc etc does not mean that the result of that contest is "official" in any capacity. Who hosted that contest? Why are they significant? What makes them "official"? Being popular does not make you official, at least not by wikipedia notability standards. If an organization of well-established notability, like say the United Nations, declared that this was indeed the international symbol of human rights, in a way akin to the Red Cross is an international symbol, then that would be one thing. But a recent, popular contest by a non-notable organization does not make this in any way suitable for wikipedia, and pushing it now because it "will (quite sure) be in vast international use" is jumping the gun. If it enters vast international use, maybe then. But until then this is something someone made up one day and thus not for wikipedia. --Pfhorrest (talk) 23:53, 2 October 2011 (UTC)