Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organized Labour/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Battle of Blair Mountain

I'm offering a bounty (payable as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation) for improvements to the Battle of Blair Mountain. £15 for bringing it up to B-class, another £40 to get it to Good Article status, and another £100 to get it to Featured Article. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 16:29, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Labour vs. labor in the template

So, there's a debate about consistency of usage in the Organized Labour template. The existing template uses both British and American spellings. But there is an argument being made that it should only be "labor". Thoughts? It will be switched (and not by me) to "labor" if there is no discussion. - Tim1965 (talk) 15:15, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Intention to edit "Circular Migration"

The current Circular Migration article is in need of improvement in several areas. Although it exists, it is referenced poorly, lacks details and links to other pages, has some citation errors, and omits crucial aspects of the issues. Upon first glance, the most striking thing is the pure lack of substantive and relevant information. The page has no table of contents and has only two sparse sections.The first sentence of the article lists many issues related to the topic of circular migration, but does not go into detail about any of them. Of the material that is present, most of it focuses solely on the United States. While circular migration involving the United States as a destination country is important, there are many other crucial areas of the issue that should be explored. The given example of Puerto Rico is interesting, but I believe that the example of Israel should be omitted. Many international examples provide a greater context and more in-depth understanding of the topic, including circular migration both between countries and within a country between urban and rural areas. Furthermore, the current article presents little information on other facets of circular migration, such as healthcare, women, global policy, and international development. I would like to provide an overview of the issue and its statistics, do an in-depth analysis of both the costs and benefits of circular migration, and include information on the aforementioned facets of the topic. I intend to edit this article, using sources from the International Labor Review, International Migration, scholars such as Connelly, Gidwani, Newland, and reports by the International Organization for Migration. I would greatly appreciate any suggestions that you all may have, in terms of content, organization, or additional sources! I hope to make this article as strong as possible.Twoods158 (talk) 22:42, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

1st National Convention, Denver, Colorado, July 1937.jpg

• File:1st National Convention, Denver, Colorado, July 1937.jpg
• commons:File:1st National Convention, Denver, Colorado, July 1937.jpg

have been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:21, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Sidhatfield.jpg

file:Sidhatfield.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 03:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Sir Sidney William George Ford MBE.jpg

file:Sir Sidney William George Ford MBE.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 03:33, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Yup, it's going to be deleted. Too bad that there wasn't an OTRS record from the family giving permission for it to be used on WP or on Commons. - Tim1965 (talk) 16:17, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

New Article: Migrant Workers in China

I'm a student at Rice University, and I'm planning on writing a new article on Migrant Workers in China for a course: Education Program:Rice University/Poverty, Justice, Human Capabilities, Section 2 (Fall 2013)
I hope to provide an overview, go over the history and origins, cover major factors, and discuss the different impacts of the phenomenon. If you have any comments, suggestions, or revisions, please let me know!

1. Overview
2. History and Origins
3. Factors

a. Economic

b. Social

c. Political

i. Hukou

ii. Other

4. Impact

a. Labor Supply

i. Domestic Work

ii. Factory Work

iii. Sex Work

b. Social

i. Gender Roles

ii. Class

iii. Health

iv. Education

v. Inequality

5. Theories for the Future
6. See Also
7. References
8. Further Reading

References: Chan, Chris King-Chi, and Pun Ngai. “The Making of a New Working Class? A Study of Collective Actions of Migrant Workers in South China.” The China Quarterly 198 (June 22, 2009): 287. doi:10.1017/S0305741009000319.
Chan, Jenny, and Ngai Pun. “Suicide as Protest for the New Generation of Chinese Migrant Workers: Foxconn, Global Capital, and the State.” The Asia-Pacific Journal 8, no. 37 (2010): 2–10.
Chan, Kam Wing, and Li Zhang. “The Hukou System and Rural-Urban Migration in China: Processes and Changes.” The China Quarterly 160 (1999): 818–855. doi:10.1017/S0305741000001351.
Connelly, Rachel, Kenneth Roberts, and Zhenzhen Zheng. “The Impact of Circular Migration on the Position of Married Women in Rural China.” Feminist Economics 16, no. 1 (2010): 3–41. doi:10.1080/13545700903382752.
Démurger, Sylvie, Marc Gurgand, Shi Li, and Ximing Yue. “Migrants as Second-class Workers in Urban China? A Decomposition Analysis.” Journal of Comparative Economics 37, no. 4 (December 2009): 610–628. doi:10.1016/j.jce.2009.04.008.
Fan, C. Cindy. China on the Move: Migration, the State, and the Household. Routledge, 2008.
Friedman, Eli. “Outside the New China | Jacobin.” Accessed September 26, 2013. http://jacobinmag.com/2013/09/outside-the-new-china/.
Froissart, Chloé. “Review of ‘China on the Move: Migration, the State and the Household’.” The China Quarterly 196 (January 12, 2009): 937. doi:10.1017/S0305741008001409.
Hesketh, Therese, Ye Xue Jun, Li Lu, and Wang Hong Mei. “Health Status and Access to Health Care of Migrant Workers in China.” Public Health Reports 123, no. 2 (2008): 189.
Ichimura, Shinichi. Decentralization Policies in Asian Development. World Scientific, 2008.
Keung Wong, Daniel Fu, Chang Ying Li, and He Xue Song. “Rural Migrant Workers in Urban China: Living a Marginalised Life: Rural Migrant Workers in Urban China.” International Journal of Social Welfare 16, no. 1 (January 2007): 32–40. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2397.2007.00475.x.
Knight, John, Lina Song, and Jia Huaibin. “Chinese Rural Migrants in Urban Enterprises: Three Perspectives.” Journal of Development Studies 35, no. 3 (February 1999): 73–104. doi:10.1080/00220389908422574.
Knight, John, and Linda Yueh. “Job Mobility of Residents and Migrants in Urban China.” Journal of Comparative Economics 32, no. 4 (December 2004): 637–660. doi:10.1016/j.jce.2004.07.004.
Lee, Ching Kwan. “Review of Yan Hairong ‘New Masters, New Servants: Migration, Development and Women Workers in China’.” The China Quarterly 200 (December 16, 2009): 1099. doi:10.1017/S0305741009990713.
Wang, Feng, and Xuejin Zuo. “Inside China’s Cities: Institutional Barriers and Opportunities for Urban Migrants,” n.d.
Wing Chan, Kam, and Will Buckingham. “Is China Abolishing the Hukou System?” The China Quarterly 195 (2008): 582–606. doi:10.1017/S0305741008000787.
Zhao, Yaohui. “Labor Migration and Earnings Differences: The Case of Rural China.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 47, no. 4 (July 1999): 767–782. doi:10.1086/452431.
———. “The Role of Migrant Networks in Labor Migration: The Case of China,” n.d.
Zheng, Tiantian. Red Lights. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009.
Zhi, Huayong, Zhurong Huang, Jikun Huang, Scott D. Rozelle, and Andrew D. Mason. “Impact of the Global Financial Crisis in Rural China: Gender, Off-farm Employment, and Wages.” Feminist Economics 19, no. 3 (2013): 238–266. doi:10.1080/13545701.2013.809137. GavinCross (talk) 20:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

GAR

Criticism of Walmart, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Dana boomer (talk) 16:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Justin Potter

Hello. I am working on Justin Potter's page. He owned hundreds of coal mines in Kentucky and sent hired guards to keep union members away from his mines. Would any of you be interested in expanding his page with regards to his relationship with unions, as long as you are able to find the right references/citations?Zigzig20s (talk) 11:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

AfC submission - 05/03

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Women in the U.S. Labor Force after World War II through 1950. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Pyramid of Capitalist System

Feel free to copyedit and expand my new DYK, of interest to this project, I think. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:02, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Trade unions in Costa Rica

Is this project still active? If so, could somebody please add relevant templates, categories, and so forth on Trade unions in Costa Rica? There is a "Part of a series on Organized labor" menu and an "Organized labour portal" box at the bottom. Mvblair (talk) 21:22, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject Organized Labour at Wikimania 2014

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 13:09, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Warehouseman

Please help fix this poor stub. It was almost deleted. Bearian (talk) 14:13, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Revisions to Child labour in Bangladesh article

I am planning on editing and restructuring the current Child labour in Bangladesh article. It belongs in the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour but has yet to receive a quality or importance rating. I hope that my edits will bring up both the quality and importance of this article. It is currently lacking in depth of content and scholarly sources. I plan to increase coverage of this topic by adding material through citing reputable resources such as published books and papers, articles from academic journals, and government statistics.

I plan on adding a "Definitions" section and a "Initiatives against Child Labor" section to provide a more comprehensive and holistic coverage of the topic. I also plan on restructuring the existing "Prevalence and Impact" section by splitting it into two sections: "Causes" and "Prevalence and Impact". The causes section will focus on main causes of child labor while the prevalence and impact section will focus on different industries using child labor in Bangladesh.

If anyone has more information on legislation and initiatives concerning child labor regulations in Bangladesh, please feel free to comment. I would also appreciate any and all feedback or suggestions on the best ways to improve this article. I would love references to even more scholarly sources pertaining to the topic. Thank you. Aaie21 (talk) 03:44, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Expert attention

This is a notice about Category:Organized Labour articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. Iceblock (talk) 13:21, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

• Interesting. Thanks! - Tim1965 (talk) 15:33, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Lists of strikes by country

Hello. I have started the List of strikes in Spain. I still have to add more strikes in the past years. It would be nice to have a list per country, this info is missing in Wikipedia. emijrp (talk) 10:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

• Have you seen the article List of strikes? It contains a large number of strikes, although the best-documented ones tend to be in the U.S. and Western Europe. - Tim1965 (talk) 16:42, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I saw it. But I follow the scheme of spliting by country as in other topics. Otherwise the main list will be overloaded. emijrp (talk) 16:51, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

At least it provides a starting point for creating the other country lists. - Tim1965 (talk) 17:47, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

New article feedback

As part of a class assignment, I am planning on writing a new article on Worker's Rights in U.S. Meat and Poultry Plants. It will be listed as a part of this WikiProject. To make sure the proposed article is focused, its scope will be limited to conditions and implications of American meat and poultry production plants during the 20th and 21st centuries. As of now, I intend on writing a section on the characteristics of American meat production plants, with a subsection on the demographics of workers in the industry, which includes content on the non-immigrant, legal immigrant, and illegal immigrant workers. The second section of the article will cover the implications and consequences for workers, with subsections on mental and emotional and physical effects. The fourth section will examine policy and legislation related to workers' rights in slaughterhouses and poultry plants as well as looking at international and domestic employment protections. Last, to ensure all perspectives are represented, the article will include a section on industry response.

I have already identified a number of scholarly articles and books as sources for this proposed article. To name a few, the revised edition of An Unfair Advantage: Workers' Freedom of Association in the United States under International Human Rights Standards by Lance Compra, and Slaughterhouse Blues: The Meat and Poultry Industry in North America (2nd edition) by Donald Stull and Michael Broadway should be useful monographs. I intend on complementing these books with articles from the USDA Agricultural Economics Reports, the International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, the Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy, the Journal of Politics and Society, and the Population and Development Review.

I would really appreciate any feedback on the proposed content or any issues you might foresee, as well as any suggestions for other scholarly sources. Thank you so much Kvanschilfgaarde (talk) 04:58, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Category:AFL–CIO litigation

Category:AFL–CIO litigation, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion and partial upmerging. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:09, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/1934 Seattle Longshoremen Strike

Dear organized labour experts:

The above old AfC draft will soon be deleted unless someone takes an interest in it. Should this topic have a separate article, or should some of it be moved to 1934 West Coast waterfront strike? Some of the references aren't appropriate, but this one and this one could be used.—Anne Delong (talk) 21:45, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

UK miners' strike 1984-1985

Hello. I was wondering if someone would undertake a new assessment of the article UK miners' strike (1984-1985). This article is still marked as having multiple issues, but I think that these have now been resolved. An assessment in 2009 said that the article seemed biased towards the striking miners and towards Marxist interpretations of the media, particularly on the issue of violence. I think that the article has plenty of information on the violence around the strike now. Epa101 (talk) 17:58, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm going to remove them. I feel that it's unfair to keep those tags on the article based on an assessment from years ago. I'm aware that I might not be seen as a neutral judge, since I am the main contributor to the article in recent times, but you can't say that I didn't try to get someone else involved. Epa101 (talk) 21:46, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Involuntary termination of employment listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Involuntary termination of employment to be moved to Termination of employment. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:32, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Americans for Prosperity

Hi. Another edited added the above group to this project. I'm a member of several projects, which strive to focus their attention on the core articles dealing with those projects. Therefore, if the other editor is correct, do organizations such as Center for American Progress, Slate (magazine), Huffington Post, and the Tea Party Movement need to be included as well? Since all advocate one way or another for Organized Labor? Thanks for any input you can give. Onel5969 (talk) 13:53, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I would say Americans for Prosperity shouldn't be marked as part of WikiProject Organized Labour. There are thousands of groups which oppose organized labor in the United States, but most do so only as part of a broader ideological objective. Only a handful, such as the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, see this as central to their mission. - Tim1965 (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, and very quickly, Tim1965! That was my thought as well. I'm not a member of this project, but when I page I look over gets categorized, I try to ensure it's correct. Since there was disagreement about this, I decided to get direction from the project itself. Again, thanks. Onel5969 (talk) 15:05, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I see this as the distinction between the film industry press (like Daily Variety and The Hollywood Reporter) and general newspapers or magazines which carry film news. No one would call The Los Angeles Times a film industry newspaper, even though it covers Hollywood closely. Even Entertainment Weekly would be called a fan magazine, rather than a Hollywood trade publication. I see parallels between this and the direction a contributor tried to take Americans for Prosperity in. I myself think it crossed the line. I can see why they might think it belong to this project, because labor was mentioned in the lead. But it's just not AfP's priority. That could change, but for now (as I see it) it's not. - Tim1965 (talk) 17:52, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I respectfully nominate Americans for Prosperity for inclusion among the articles of interest of our project. I would please like to hear from other fellow project members on this nomination.

AFP's anti-labor agenda is central and defining, although yes not their exclusive arena. AFP is taking corporate funding and reshaping the organized labor landscape in the US. AFP played a key role in stripping public employee unions of their collective bargaining rights, and in the promulgation right-to-work laws, in upper midwestern, traditionally union, manufacturing-belt states, whereas previously right-to-work laws had been characteristic only of southern US states. The emphasis in the article on AFP's anti-labor activities is entirely proportional to the emphasis in reliable sources, which please see in the copious references.

Our project page notes the need for updating in the area of union busting. The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a useful analogy. While NRWLDF is a 501(c)(3) public foundation, AFP is a 501(c)(4) "social welfare," "public education" not-for-profit. While NRWLDF works in the courts, AFP works in the streets, grass-roots lobbying and supporting political candidates who agree with their agenda with television advertising and canvassing of voters. Related articles which are in-scope for our project include Right-to-work law, 2011 United States public employee protests, and Ohio Senate Bill 5 Voter Referendum, Issue 2.

Sorry I missed the earlier discussion, there was no notice back at article talk. For the record I do not suggest Slate or the Huffington Post or any other articles for inclusion in our project. Thank you very much for your kind consideration of this nomination. Hugh (talk) 05:28, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

• If there is that kind of evidence, then you're probably right and I guess it should be added to Wikiproject Organized Labour. - Tim1965 (talk) 02:46, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

I agree with Hugh that this would fit within the realm of the project, while this isn't an obvious or natural fit, it seems that if the Pinkertons is part of the project then (albeit to a lesser extent) AFP could fit. Both oppose/d organized labor. Capitalismojo (talk) 19:22, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Greetings fellow OL participants, I am seeking additional concurrence from my fellow project participants on the inclusion of Americans for Prosperity within the scope of our project. I am interested in working on expanding our encyclopedia's coverage of corporate funded, organized anti-union political activity. I believe a compelling case for inclusion has been made, above. Americans for Prosperity is a critically important actor in the reshaping of the organized labor landscape in the United States. Your concurrence will help close an unfortunate WikiProject banner tagging dispute. Thank you in advance for your support. Hugh (talk) 17:09, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Respectfully request concurrence from my fellow project participants on bannering Americans for Prosperity. The article has undergone an extensive collaborative good article drive, and has weathered increased scrutiny as it approaches the completeness required by good article criteria. The article is currently tagged by WikiProject Conservatism, and the content reflects this. A very few seconds of your time to chime in here on this thread with a quick "sounds good" or "ok by me" or even "why not?" will help bring to good status an article about a key player in the organized, corporate-funded suppression of unions in the US. Thank you in advance for your time. Hugh (talk) 18:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I would just like to note that WikiProjects do not and should not imply a point of view. The AFP article is a part of WikiProject Conservatism because it is a conservative political organization. Being a part of WikiProject Conservatism doesn't and shouldn't mean the article has a conservative bias. The founder of that project, User:Lionelt, is actually a Democrat. WikiProjects are about sorting and improving articles based on common themes. They aren't about injecting certain points of view. I honestly don't care whether or not AFP is part of WikiProject Organized Labour--this seems like a rather silly dispute--but I'll note that it's troubling from a neutrality perspective that the stated argument for including it is to show that AFP is part of the "corporate-funded suppression of unions in the US." That shows a definite agenda and point of view that goes against Wikipedia's neutrality pillar. Champaign Supernova (talk) 19:11, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but this is complete nonsense. First of all, WikiProject Conservatism shouldn't even exist. The reason it exists is because a user named "Lionelt", often thought to be a troll of epic proportions, canvassed conservatives on Wikipedia for months on end to "fight" the libtards. His oft-repeated claim that he was actually a "Democrat" is one of the most absurd, trollish comments that appears on any Wikipedia user page anywhere. That Champaign Supernova either is not aware of these facts nor the sordid history of WikiProject Conservatism and the dozens of heated debates about its complete absence of a project scope and its sole existence to act as a proxy for Conservapedia on Wikipedia, tells me that Champaign Supernova doesn't have all the facts, or if he does, isn't being very forthcoming. With that said, it is quite rich to hear Champaign Supernova talk about an "agenda" and "point of view", when WikiProject Conservatism is the agenda-driven POV pushing project par excellence above all others. I suggest you do your homework and look through the reams of discussions and AN/ANI reports involving Lionelt and his fellow trollsters, including the sock puppet armies, the hundreds of non-notable stubs, the biased POV pushing in an attempt to create a conservative alternate reality, and the reliance on brainwashed Conservapediots, whose only purpose is to destroy the secular milieu of Wikipedia from the inside out. Please, spare us the fantasy world. Nobody in their right mind believes Lionelt is a "Democrat", and nobody believes WikiProject Conservatism serves a useful function. I mean, this is funny as some kind of performance art, but seeing you repeat it up above is bordering on Philip K. Dickian science fiction. Let me repeat this in case you didn't get it the first time: Lionelt wasn't being serious about being a "Democrat" and WikiProject Conservatism isn't a useful project. Anyone who spends five minutes analyzing the data spewed from WikiProject Conservatism, including the actions of its members, discovers that this project was nothing but an astroturfing operation coordinated off-wiki to promote conservative candidates during the election cycle. And yes, you can take that to the bank. And surprise, surprise, what do we find? That is exactly what "Americans for Prosperity" is, a classic astroturfing organization run by the usual suspects. Champaign Supernova, your comments are highly revealing. Viriditas (talk) 02:40, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Calm down, bro. Everything is going to be alright. Champaign Supernova (talk) 04:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't give a hoot about WikiProject Conservatism. I do care about WikiProject Organized Labour. I was not present when Organized Labour was founded, and as far as I can tell few of the founding members are still active. However, from my perspective, the project was organized to enhance coverage of topics related to trade unions, organized labour, and topics traditionally associated with these (such as the minimum wage, workplace health and safety legislation, labour laws, and so forth). Certain organizations, such as so-called "union-busters" in the United States or the National Right to Work Foundation, were traditionally included in the WikiProject, as they directly opposed unionization efforts. This also included political organizations, such as Labour parties. But it did not include political parties, such as the Republican Party of the United States or the Tories of the United Kingdom, which were generally opposed to labour unions and sought to weaken or eliminate laws which protected trade unions and their activities. Nor did it include fairly anti-union politicians, such as Robert A. Taft or Margaret Thatcher.

I mention this, because I wanted to make others aware that the WikiProject Organized Labour wasn't merely a neutral sorting project "about labour". It was a sorting project with a distinct view point, a pro-labour viewpoint even. The project included anti-union articles only where those individuals, organizations, events, laws, etc., reached a certain criticality important to labour history. This "criticality" was never clearly defined or (insofar as I saw) consciously addressed. But, from what I saw going on in the Organized Labour Project, few Project members were tagging articles about individuals, organizations, events, laws, etc., which were "generally opposed to trade unions or the union movement". Even when a politician (for example) was virulently anti-trade union and won major victories against the trade union movement (e.g., Margaret Thatcher), there was no attempt made as far as I could tell to include that person under the WikiProject Organized Labour banner. Please note that in many nations other than U.S. and those in Wester Europe, there are extremely dominant and very powerful anti-trade union politicians, political parties, and groups — and none of these were ever tagged by WikiProject Organized Labour.

I also want to mention another aspect of WikiProject Organized Labour which may be relevant. There was a lot of debate in WikiProject Organized Labour early on about how to include labour-related coverage in articles about businesses. Many businesses are unionized, and the labour history of a particular business (such as U.S. Steel) may be important, even critical, to the history of the business itself. The Project established a /Labour representation sub-page, with specific guidelines about how to address these issues in the contact of articles about businesses and corporations without triggering NPOV concerns or in ways that inappropriately divert the article's focus from the business itself to its labour relations.

Finally, I'm concerned about the conclusionary nature of the Americans for Prosperity article. While well-cited to largely unbiased sources, the wording of each sentence is sometimes, even often, not supported by the text of the citation. Let's just look at the one section on anti-organized labour activities in Wisconsin.

• The first sentence reads: "AFP's activities in Wisconsin developed the state into the nation's foremost conservative-progressive battleground, and AFP used tactics in Wisconsin that were applied in later campaigns." All true. But not specific to labour. Yet, by inclusion under the section heading "Wisconsin collective bargaining", the reader may be misled into thinking that the battleground was only or primarily about collective bargaining rights, and the tactics used primary related to the Act 10 (the anti-collective bargaining law) battle, when neither is supported by the citations.
• The second sentence reads: "AFP has been a major supporter of Republican Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker." Again, true. But primarily because of Walker's anti-union agenda? We're looking for criticality, something that makes AfP not "just another anti-union PAC" but one primarily opposed to unions. Supporting a conversative politician in general does not, it seems to me, meet that criticality rule.
• The third sentence reads: "In 2009 and 2010, AFP helped raise the statewide profile of Walker, then Milwaukee County county executive, by inviting him to address its rallies." Again, true, but not primarily related to his anti-union stand.
• The fourth sentence reads: "In 2011, when Walker's agenda of reduced spending, cuts to union benefits, and limits on public-sector collective bargaining drew thousands in opposition to the streets around the state capitol in Madison, AFP bussed in hundreds to counter-protest." Again, true. But from the way the sentence reads, Walker's anti-union agenda was only one aspect of his program that drew protests. We're not meeting the criticality guideline. Also, it's not clear at all from the sentence or the citation that the counter-protesters were there primarily to support Walker's anti-union stand and legislative efforts.
• The fifth sentence reads: "AFP spent $320,000 on television advertisements and sponsored a website and bus tour themed 'Stand Against Spending, Stand With Walker'." Again, all true. While some of the cites are quite clear that the $320,000 was for specifically pro-Act 10 ads, and at least one rally specifically addressed Act 10, to my mind what's missing is whether this was the major effort of AfP or just one segment (a big segment? a little one?) that was part of AfP's spending and efforts in Wisconsin at that time.
• The sixth sentence reads: "AFP spent $3 million in opposition to the recall campaign against Walker in 2011–2012 and sent 75 trained canvasers to Wisconsin." All true, but not specific to the labor issue. A lot of Walker's legislation was opposed, and by a wide range of groups.
• The seventh sentence reads: "After the passage of Walker's signature legislation, the 2011 Wisconsin Act 10, which limited collective bargaining rights for most public employees, AFP ran advertisements and held town-hall meetings with the theme 'It's Working Wisconsin!'" First, one citation ("Capitol rally to mark one year since Act 10", The Journal-Sentinel) only says that "conservatives" (not specifically AfP) were holding "It's Working Wisconsin" rallies around the state. Second, the other citation ("Americans for Prosperity spending big in new ad touting Walker", WGEM.com) says the ad campaign talked about ending collective bargaining rights as well as making public employees pay more for pensions and healthcare benefits (two distinctly different issues).
• The eighth sentence reads: "Days before the recall election, AFP sponsored a ten-city bus tour themed 'A Better Wisconsin'." Yes, it did. But did this tour primarily address Act 10's collective bargaining repeal, or did it address a host of issues Walker pressed for? It seems the latter; at any rate, neither cite ("Americans for Prosperity: Our Pro-Walker Bus Tour Has Nothing to Do With Recall", Mother Jones; "Crunch time for recall volunteers", CNN) is clear enough to warrant (I think) the conclusion being drawn (that the bus tour was primarily about Walker's labour policies).
• The ninth sentence ("In the context of Walker's 2014 re-election campaign, AFP purchased television issue advertisements in support of Act 10."), is also true. But if you listen to the audio in the citation, the ad itself (quoted only in part) mentions Walker's "strong management" and "real budget reform", while the reporter then mentions Act 10. Act 10 was only one of several issues addressed, yet the reader might led to believe only the collective bargaining aspects of Act 10 were mentioned.

The reason why I went through this so carefully is because I'm trying to get a sense of how critical the anti-union effort was to AfP's broader conservative agenda. Act 10 drew the most attention, from the media and labour and progressive groups. But was it central to AfP's agenda? Were other issues (which were not as vigorously opposed) also central to AfP's agenda? It's hard to say. "Act 10" encompassed not just collective bargaining, but pay, pensions, health insurance, and sick leave. So many of the citations say that AfP was supporting "Act 10", but it's entirely unclear if this meant primarily the collective bargaining aspects of Act 10 or the entirety of Act 10.

I've gone back and forth on this issue about including Americans for Prosperity in WikiProject Organized Labour. I admit, that I'm still thinking about it. But, tentatively, I would return to my original gut-feeling position: AfP is very conservative, very anti-union, but it's not clear to me at all (after more extensive review) that organized labour is a central part of AfP's agenda. AfP seems to have spent money and campaigned hard in a single state (Wisconsin) on the issue, but it also campaigned hard on a wide range of Walker-supported laws. The Michigan campaign seemed desultory in comparison (a booklet, a Web site and one rally). Nationwide, AfP hasn't addressed the issue, apparently, and climate change, taxes, healthcare reform, Obama's reelection, and fiscal policy seem to be its primary issues.

I've found myself applying these criteria: Does a detailed analysis of the article's text specify support the claim that the organization has an anti-union agenda (or just a broadly conservative one)?; Is the the article text well-supported by the citations (or only vaguely so)?; Does the article clearly show that the anti-union agenda is part of the organization's broader national agenda (as opposed to a localized agenda by one chapter of the organization)?; and Does the article text clearly show that the anti-union agenda is a major part of the organization's national agenda (or just one small or localized element of it)?

Myself, I've tentatively concluded that, in its current form, the AfP article doesn't meet the criteria and shouldn't be tagged for inclusion in WikiProject Organized Labour. (I reserve the right to change my mind, again and again...) - Tim1965 (talk) 19:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Tim. Thank you for your thorough read and thoughtful comments. I would like to respond to some of your points. But first, most of this section seems to be inadvertently duplicated. Please take a crack at straightening this out and I will share. Thanks again. Hugh (talk) 20:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Tradesman listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Tradesman to be moved to Tradesperson. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:29, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

Violent labor disputes in the United States listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Violent labor disputes in the United States to be moved to List of worker slayings in labor disputes in the United States. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here.Jeff in CA (talk) 04:40, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Pulaski Skyway listed at FAR

I have nominated Pulaski Skyway for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Imzadi 1979 → 01:53, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Seeking technical help with union membership and finances graphs

Last year I added several dozen line charts to union articles based on US Department of Labor OLMS reports covering union membership and finances, using Template:Line chart. However, the process of gathering the data (awful OLMS database) and reformatting it (cludgy template) was so exhausting I gave up for a year. I'm now looking to update and to continue this effort, and Wikipedia has a new graphing function which might make this much easier and better, but converting from the old template seems overwhelming.

I put the details of the project on my talk page.

It's a big project and I bit off more than I could chew. Any help would be appreciated and would benefit dozens of labor articles. djr13 (talk) 22:40, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Finnish Association of Graduate Engineers listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Finnish Association of Graduate Engineers to be moved to Academic Engineers and Architects in Finland TEK. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 14:29, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude {{bots|deny=RMCD bot}}, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.