Talk:Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Military history (Rated Start-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject International relations / law (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia.
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 see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject International law (marked as High-importance).

Major edit 23 Aug 2006 - correcting misinformation introduced 5 Jan 2006[edit]


I basically reverted the change of

The burden of the 5 January 2006 edit is a misconception - art theft in war is of course an important legal issue but not one that is the focus of the convention that this article is about.

Source: see text of convention, linked in article.

Tschild 13:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Additional project[edit]

I have added the article to the International relations project. PKKloeppel (talk) 15:10, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

USA and Chile did not sign[edit]

In some articles is stated, that the USA did not signed this treaty (eg Pax Cultura or Protective sign). Should this not be mentioned here? Sebastian scha. (talk) 22:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)


I just marked a whole section for copyvio, as it appeared to be copied wholesale from the website. Upon further investigation, it seems the first of the marked paragraphs is merely an uncited quotation from the treaty itself, rather than an outright violation. The rest appears to be commentary, and a cursory glance did not reveal such in the treaty or other PD documents, though a deeper search may be warranted. Morgan Riley (talk) 03:03, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:36, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

The same has happened again with this edit... Reverting... L.tak (talk) 00:03, 3 December 2012 (UTC)