Jump to content

Talk:Freedom of religion in Russia: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎NPOV: country is rotten
→‎NPOV: Reply
Line 22: Line 22:


I don't agree with JW, but they are the canary in the coalmine. You know that the country is rotten if it bans JW. [[User:tgeorgescu|tgeorgescu]] ([[User talk:tgeorgescu|talk]]) 23:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
I don't agree with JW, but they are the canary in the coalmine. You know that the country is rotten if it bans JW. [[User:tgeorgescu|tgeorgescu]] ([[User talk:tgeorgescu|talk]]) 23:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

:Someone else seems to has also replaced it, however there were numerous problems with the original statement:
:> In the Russian Federation, Jehovah Witnesses are persecuted since 2017 for no apparent reason, which reminds people of the Inquisition.
:First, "no apparent reason" was editorializing, there were reasons given in the previous paragraph, and a non-encyclopedic tone.
:Second, "which reminds people of the Inquisition" was an opinion of a single journalist in the citation given, but the statement was written as if wikipedia was stating a fact using persuasive writing. I considered quoting the person who made the statement, but as the page is quite long, decided against it.
:The last remaining part about the JW being persecuted since 2017 was covered in the preceding paragraph, so it seemed unnecessary to repeat it. [[User:Jordan Mendelson|Jordan Mendelson]] ([[User talk:Jordan Mendelson|talk]]) 01:38, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:38, 2 October 2022

Jehovah's Witnesses ban

The last few paragraphs are uncited and are written without an NPOV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.197.132 (talk) 23:39, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Much of the article is actually unsourced, I have added a relevant tag. —PaleoNeonate17:42, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Even worse, the entire page seems to be lifted from this 2007 US government report with a 99.6% Earwig score. It's more than 10 years out of date in any case, and may be best to start over from scratch. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:24, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, apparently the source is in the public domain. The article needs to be rewritten for encyclopedic tone but I don't want to do that when the information is 11 years out of date. Needs updating and more sources for better NPOV. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:53, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's been a bit since this was looked at, I know, but there are some pretty significantly noteable developments in the last 6-8 months especially and the last year overall. The campaign against religious minorities, with Witnesses as particular targets, is being talked about by Amnesty International and multiple news outlets. One particular prisoner is being treated as the lead and getting a lot of coverage from Radio Free Europe (among others) and even has government-level rights groups, like the US Commission on International Religious Freedom, watching. Just some added links for thought. --HiroQ (talk) 01:22, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jehovah's Witnesses persecution

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=ru&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vesti.ru%2Fdoc.html%3Fid%3D3128480 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.200.186.102 (talk) 19:08, 22 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

@Jordan Mendelson: See WP:NOTNEUTRAL and Okrent's law.

I don't agree with JW, but they are the canary in the coalmine. You know that the country is rotten if it bans JW. tgeorgescu (talk) 23:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else seems to has also replaced it, however there were numerous problems with the original statement:
> In the Russian Federation, Jehovah Witnesses are persecuted since 2017 for no apparent reason, which reminds people of the Inquisition.
First, "no apparent reason" was editorializing, there were reasons given in the previous paragraph, and a non-encyclopedic tone.
Second, "which reminds people of the Inquisition" was an opinion of a single journalist in the citation given, but the statement was written as if wikipedia was stating a fact using persuasive writing. I considered quoting the person who made the statement, but as the page is quite long, decided against it.
The last remaining part about the JW being persecuted since 2017 was covered in the preceding paragraph, so it seemed unnecessary to repeat it. Jordan Mendelson (talk) 01:38, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]