Talk:Human rights in Colombia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

48px} This article is part of WikiProject Human rights, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Human rights 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 contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the assessment scale.
Colombia Portal
This article is within the scope of the Colombian WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to Colombia-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards. Click here and join us!.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

[edit] Suggestion

Hi again, F3rn4nd0 and anyone else editing this page at this time. I know that the page is barely under construction at the moment, and it would be more useful to make direct contributions than just suggestions (which I will eventually do, if time and circumstances allow), but a couple of points do come up:

  • Making the main sub-section "human rights violations" and, together with certain phrases, assuming a moral and political stance from the get-go (outside of quotes/arguments/ideas attributed to specific persons or organizations, obviously), while understandable for evident reasons as the situation is indeed grave in many ways, seems like the wrong idea from an encyclopedic and neutral point of view. It also limits addressing positive or at least less negative aspects of the human rights situation, such as what the laws actually contemplate (whether just in theory or not) and recent advances in gay and abortion rights (but not limited to them), off the top of my head. In other words, violations *are* an essential part of the article, that is unquestionable, but not the only one.
  • Ideally, I think it is the different parties who should be making a case for this or that, not the person(s) who write(s) the article(s), any of us included. In addition to the above, that comes dangerously close to being original research, which isn't allowed by Wikipedia though many articles still have greater or lesser signs of that. So there should be more than one point of view, not just the government's or AI's, but also that of the UN, U.S., other independent and non-independent entities, academics of different political inclinations, different journalists and political figures, etc. This shouldn't read like an essay or thesis, in essence.

Good luck, hopefully I'll be able to do more substantial contributions later on...feel free to discuss this further as well.Juancarlos2004 (talk) 19:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

You are invited to participate at any time.. --F3rn4nd0 (Roger - Out) 19:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)