Jump to content

Talk:John Dugard

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dugard on OPT

[edit]

In January 2006, a report by John Dugard, a Special Rapporteur for the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, stated that "the three major settlement blocs - Gush Etzion, Ma’ale Adummim and Ariel - will effectively divide Palestinian territory into cantons or Bantustans." (from Question of the Violation of Human Rights in the Occupied Arab Territories, Including Palestine - Report of the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, John Dugard, on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967)

"There are both similarities and differences between apartheid South Africa and the situation in the Palestine Occupied Territory (OPT). But one similarity is clear. Israel's conduct in the OPT poses the same kind of challenge to the credibility of international human rights that apartheid did in the 1970's and 1980's. There are gross, egregious and systematic violations of human rights and international humanitarian law in the OPT, committed not by undisciplined and uncontrolled militias but by one of the most disciplined and sophisticated armies in the modern world, directed by a stable and disciplined government." (from [1])

"The Wall greatly impedes freedom of movement. Palestinians who live on the West Bank side of the Wall are denied access to their lands on the other side of the Wall, that is, in the “closed zone”, without permits. Permits are frequently withheld, especially in respect of young men who should farm the land but are seen to be security threats. Moreover, gates granting access to the closed zone are arbitrarily administered and are frequently unopened at scheduled times. This permit system may be likened to the "pass laws" of apartheid, but unlike the apartheid system – which was administered in a brutal but uniform manner – the Wall regime is characterised by its arbitrariness and lack of consistency." (from [2])

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Deodar (talk • contribs) 20:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Source Suspected by Netsnipe to be Fake

[edit]

I've removed the link to http://www.pchrgaza.org/Library/Dugard.pdf because I believe it to be a fake.

Discussion continued/moved to Talk:Allegations_of_Israeli_apartheid#Source_Suspected_by_Netsnipe_to_be_Fake

Email from John Dugard

[edit]
Subject: RE: Wikipedia: Authenticity of a statement you may have made
Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 12:22:30 +0200
Message-ID: <5DC38EFDD2DE9145A6A28B619939E5D30100AAB4@IGRSXC001C.isrv.ad.leidenuniv.nl>
From: "Dugard, C.J.R." <c.j.r.dugard(+)law.leidenuniv.nl>
To: <info-en-q(+)wikimedia.org>

Dear Mr Lau
Many thanks for your email.
First two corrections:
1) I also have an honorary degree from ther University of Pretoria.\
2) I have NOT written International Law on Abortion!
3) International Law: A South Africa perspective is now in its third
edition(2006).

As to the subject of your query. Yes, I have written in some report that
"Gaza is a prison." I cannot recall having said that "all its
inhabitants are prisoners of Israel".
But I suppose it is a logical inference.

Best regards
John Dugard

Posted by  Netsnipe  ►  18:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Netsnipe. Strangely, Amazon is confident that John Dugard did write "International Law on Abortion" - see [3]. Maybe it is Amazon's mistake -- the author isn't actually John Dugard -- or there is another John Dugard who just happens to also specialize in International Law and South Africa. --Deodar 19:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 17:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UN Human Rights Commission not Defunct

[edit]

Deleted "now-defunct" as the UN Human Rights Commission is not defunct. http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Pages/WelcomePage.aspx

"Dugard was appointed in 2001 as an unpaid expert by the now-defunct UN Human Rights Commission to investigate only violations by the Israeli side, prompting Israel and the U.S. to dismiss his reports as one-sided. Israel refused to allow him to conduct a UN-mandated fact-finding mission on its Gaza offensive in 2006. [2]" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.58.107 (talk) 20:47, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Just deleting all those links willy nilly in a display of temper is vandalism. See WP:External links. What is allowable are WP:RS news stories about him, interviews with him, statements and articles by him, etc. If there are too many or some come from sources that might have manufactured them, that can be discussed. The ADL statement should be mentioned in the text, especially if it had an WP:RS coverage, since ADL is one of the advocacy groups for whom some slack is given if its statement is relevant in context. Just putting attack pieces in external links is against policy. CarolMooreDC🗽 06:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

hi carol! what happened to WP:NPA? anyway, i think all of them were from advocacy groups or other non-RS which shouldn't be on a BLP page. and yes, RS coverage and then put in the article would be a much better route to take. glad we can agree on this. Soosim (talk) 06:51, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sooism: your edit summary "seems that according to carol, all of these are in violation of wp:blp and RS, etc.)" looks like you were just ticked off to me. Here are the external links in question with my comments:
Any problems with that? CarolMooreDC🗽 07:39, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
yes, quite a few. pchr, miftah, ei, ceasefire mag are not acceptable here or just about anywhere. Soosim (talk) 08:35, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Wikipedia:External_links#What_can_normally_be_linked: 4. Sites that fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources.
And Wikipedia:External_links#In_biographies_of_living_people: In biographies of living people, material available solely in questionable sources or sources of dubious value should be handled with caution, and, if derogatory, should not be used at all, either as sources or via external links. External links in biographies of living persons must be of high quality and are judged by a higher standard than for other articles. Do not link to websites that are not fully compliant with this guideline or that contradict the spirit of WP:BLP.
In other words if a knowledgeable source (like the subject of the bio) writes for or is interviewed in a usually not reliable source, and there isn't a lot of negative commentary connected with it, it can be used. Do we have to quote above and bring them all to WP:RSN?? CarolMooreDC🗽 15:37, 17 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Criticisms of Dugard Section

[edit]

Does it make sense to dedicate almost a quarter of the article space to 'Criticism of Dugard'? Particularly when such criticism comes from the Anti-Defamation League and UN Watch, two organisations with strong links to Israel which are specifically dedicated to bullying any critics of Israeli policy and, as such, can hardly be described as neutral or objective sources. I am not saying that the whole section needs to be removed per se but dedicating so much space including extended quotations which criticise an eminent and highly respected international law scholar such as John Dugard, particularly on his wikipedia page, appears to be an unwarranted abuse of Wikipedia's editing freedoms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.126.54.252 (talk) 21:03, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on John Dugard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:36, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Dugard. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:00, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A warning about potential vandalism.

[edit]

Mr Dugard has been selected as part of a South African case brought to the ICJ alleging genocidal conduct by Israel against the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip. As is unfortunately the case across Wikipedia, his page is already devoted disproportionately to criticism of him by pro-Israel organizations and individuals. I suggests at the very least locking it before the bulk of the page is a pro-Israel litany. 78.176.146.138 (talk) 13:28, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Dugard&oldid=1199918132"