Talk:International Court of Justice judges election, 2011

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject International relations / United Nations / law (Rated Start-class, Low-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.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject United Nations (marked as Low-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject International law (marked as Low-importance).
 

Non-partisan election?[edit]

This page is added to the category Non-partisan elections... and if it does belong there, so do the articles on the United Nations Security Council elections (this year's), and others too, probably. So do you think it really belongs there? --... there's more than what can be linked. 20:57, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, the definition at the category page is “elections in which no political parties took part, and all candidates stood as independents” so I would assume it belongs there. Really someone should create Category:United Nations elections. —Mathew5000 (talk) 19:05, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
Well, that is not a very specific definition. I mean, could political parties actually be involved in such elections? Seems rather improbable to me.--... there's more than what can be linked. 19:31, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't know, the definition looks specific enough to me. Elections in the United Nations do not ever have political parties (as far as I am aware), so I would say that those articles are properly included in the category. That said, I don't feel strongly about it one way or the other. What are your thoughts on creating a new category for UN elections? —Mathew5000 (talk) 15:34, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
I guess we wont be creating a collection of things that don't belong if we do put these elections in the non-partisan elections category, in the end. About a United Nations elections category, yes, I think that would be a good idea. There is currently a, that should be within this new category, and it should also include things like any elections related to List of members of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights or the like. I've never created or edited a category before, so I guess you should really not be asking me, but I gave you my opinion nevertheless. --... there's more than what can be linked. 16:13, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit dispute regarding Butagira article and candidate qualifications[edit]

Regarding this edit [1], I believe it does not comport with Wikipedia policies. I have been going back and forth with editor Francisrocco and I wanted to set out my position in more detail before reverting again. There are three aspects:

(a) A Ugandan newspaper reported that Sierra Leone had made a commitment on September 22 to withdraw the candidacy of Koroma [2]. If we mention that the newspaper reporting this is based in Uganda, it is also relevant that the report was picked up in Sierra Express Media [3]. It appears to be a wire-service type of arrangement where the Sierra Express Media republishes the original article with attribution. Francisrocco edited the article to say that the author of the article published it on a Sierra Leonean website, but there is no evidence of that point of view. I think we should just say "the article was carried in Sierra Leonean media" or words to that effect.
(b) Francisrocco edited the article to say "Sierra Leone has never confirmed that it made such an undertaking. Rather, it continues to support Koroma strongly." However, there is no source for that. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
(c) Francisrocco inserted a paragraph making an argument (based on the candidates' CVs) that Koroma's legal experience is more relevant for the post than Sebutinde's. I believe this violates Wikipedia:No original research. There is no reliable source cited that makes the kind of argument Francisrocco inserted into the article. Essentially it is a synthesis that violates the No-Original-Research policy. Also I believe it violates the policy Wikipedia:Neutral point of view to include an unsourced argument for supporting one candidate over another. —Mathew5000 (talk) 00:15, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
I removed {{3O}}, as I see no dispute yet. You might want to request temporary protection for the page (see WP:PROTECT for details) to pass from edit warring to actual discussion. If the discussion will lead to clash of opinions, feel free to relist it at WP:3O. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 08:31, 13 December 2011 (UTC)