Talk:Minority group
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Minority group, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
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. |
Contents |
[edit] Potheads?
I took out the part about cannabis smokers being persicuted in the "cannibis prohibition period". How can that be in the same sentance as Jews in the Holocaust and Blacks with Jim Crow? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.70.116.230 (talk) 02:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] South Africa
I do not understand why mentioning blacks in South Africa belongs to a minority group discussion ? Does this mean that a minority group implies being oppressed rather than being a majority of the population ? During Apartheid Black people never used to describe themselves as a minority group and I am pretty sure that there are many such cases throughout the world. This article has a severe American leaning world view, if the minority group is a sociological minority as the article mentions at the beginning, then there should be a separate Wikipedia entry named sociological minority.
[edit] Bosnia and Herzegovina
Dear Nicola Smolenski, I am quite confused about your deletion of my edit. You say that what I put is not what is in the source. Please read para 37 of the source, in particular "the Advisory Committee notes at the same time that the rules governing the composition of some authorities at the State level is such as to legally exclude persons belonging to national minorities from accessing these political posts. This is for instance the case with regard to the tripartite Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which according to Article V of the Constitution shall consist of one Bosniac, one Croat and one Serb." In what way am I misquoting the source? A Roma or a Jew is clearly excluded from being elected to the Presidency. Unless of course that they decide to deny the fact that they are Roma or Jew and identify themselves instead as Bosnian, Croat or Serb. Nobody should be expected to deny their identity, it is a violation of the CoE Framework Convention on the Protection of National Minorities to which BiH is a party, and in any case the candidate would probably be rejected by the electorate of the ethnic group to which they were claiming to adhere. I look forward to having a constructive debate with you about this! Spinach charm 11:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] affirmative action and other issues
I made some edits on this section. The debate about AA often focuses exclusively on quota policies which are not the best form of AA and is what brings it into disrepute. Also added to the section on religious minorities. And changed the bit about Quebec secessionism - replaced "assimilate" with "integrate" - I am sure that if English speaking Canadians tried to assimilate the Quebequois (in fact it is happening indirectly anyway), it would promote secessionism, not defuse it! Spinach charm 10:18, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
With the exception of a few ambiguities relating to the confusion between numerical and sociological minorities that can be easily corrected with edits, the article Minority describes a minority group --a sociological, not a mathematical, concept. I'm removing the redirect to minority, and redirecting the Minority page here. Niko481 22:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RESPECT FOR OTHERS
I'm practically shocked by this article and feel myself personally insulted and offended! First, I pray you to notice that you are writing over a world site, not an only-USA one. Your repeated references to what Americans say and Americans do and Americans think is frankly irritating. From my point of view (and the point of view of everyone outside USA) what Americans say and do and think is absolutely irrilevant. Excuse me if I'm a little rude, but USA people has usually a very little knowledge and respect of other peoples. Second, I consider myself a civilized, evolved and cultured person, and I believe in reason and in science as every normal person in the modern world. Your point about atheism (strange word, connected by its own to a religious believing) is highly offensive towards every rational person. What do you mean that Americans consider Atheists below immigrants, gays etc. and don't allow their children marry atheists? I never had a good opinion of Americans, but, if this is true, I'll consider them, since this moment, as the most ignorant, savage, uncivilized people all over the world. By the way, I wish I knew WHERE you found a so incredible opinion. VAL, Italy
Blacks,asians,Mexicans,All colored people...
