344:
from using or getting WMDs or being or becoming a base for terrorists -- all sorts of reasons were given by Bush and others for the war; even bringing democracy to Iraq isn't quite the same issue as how bad the human rights record there was). And there's nothing inherently POV-forkish about separating the vast subject of Iraqi human rights violations into regime periods, since the situation obviously changed with different regimes: Before Saddam human rights were in various states; during Saddam's regime that regime was responsible for a certain level of human rights; after Saddam responsibility shifted elsewhere. The subject naturally divides that way. There is no inherent contradiction in one article describing the Saddam regime's human rights record and articles that describe human rights before or after, and no benefit to combining them that I can see. There is, without a doubt, plenty of sourceable information out there. The subject of the article is too important to delete. Too bad it hasn't been cared for better. The best argument for deleting, to my mind, is that the article shows no promise of being well-edited, despite it's importance and appropriateness.
456:" It also not a person, place, thing, or specific event requiring an entry into an encyclopedia. " Another way of saying nonencyclopedic, and I think almost everyone would say just the opposite. That other parties in iraq may have continued some such practices is no reason to exclude this part of the story.
373:
was a brutal dictator, but his actions occurred in an area of the world where
Western-style human rights are not generally respected, and it is fairly common for governments to use force, sometimes brutal force, to suppress opposition, especially from minority populations. We should view him in context.
399:
Also there are no articles on Human Rights in Hitler's
Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Stalin's Soviet Union, Mao's China, Pol Pot's Cambodia, Mubarak's Egypt, Musharraf's Pakistan, Sharon's Israel, Castro's Cuba, Shah's Iran, Bush's United States, Ceasar's Roman Empire, Alexander's Greek Empire, Xerxes
372:
He was certainly no Boy Scout, but compare for instance the violent suppression of revolt in Syria (involving thousands of deaths), the actions of the army in the
Algerian civil war in the 90s, Morocco's actions in the Western Sahara, Turkey's behavior in Turkish Kurdistan, and so on. Saddam Hussein
235:
This article at the moment looks very much like OR and without the references lacks the NPOV. Condemnation has no place in an encyclopaedia. I notice the article mentions arms dealings with Russia, China and France but fails to note
Britain and the USA doing the same. In the current form the article
308:
Reading the talk page, this series of articles evolved from a single article on human rights in Iraq; a decision was made to split them up. It would probably be a bad idea to merge them back against the wishes of the editors. The POV of the article could certainly use improvement; a comparison of
468:
That said, I think it is an outrageously unsourced article for a topic such as this, and there's a lot to be deleted from it. Eds. who workecd on an article on such a topic should try to make it really solid. Thats why I said "weak". And because of the title, but it's hard to think of a clearer
343:
The rightness or wrongness of the U.S. invasion isn't going to rest on human rights violations (other factors are involved: whether the invasion works in accomplishing various goals, whether the costs outweigh the benefits or vice versa, whether the invasion had to be done to stop Saddam's regime
117:
Contains speculation, original research, non-encyclopedic, makes many claims not atributable to anyone. It was originally an article called "The Dirty Dozen" which was a made up term nobody uses and gives no sources for such a term. It also violates guidelines for living persons. Also uses weasel
325:
These are good points, but even though there are obvious chronological reasons to split the topmost article this way, it also results in a quasi-POV fork, with the pro-invasion group editing this article and the anti-invasion group the other, both seeking to prove their convictions correct. --
537:. No reason to single out a single leader that only ruled for 20 years, or Knowledge will be littered with Human rights in (leader's name)(leader's country) articles. The only reason this article exists is in part of a demonization campaign to promote war. --
435:, which then became a movie, which has nothing to do with Iraq. When referring to Iraq (Iraq's Dirty Dozen), the source of the term is U.S. officials. Just because certain national officials use a term, doesn't mean there should be an article about (i.e.
567:
This article is also entirely negative and condemning. (NPOV) It makes no mention of positive human rights practices such as secular government, woman's rights like driving and voting (which isn't allowed in Saudi Arabia), rights given in the
362:
there's nothing irrepairable here and the subject is both noteworthy and sourceable (and any comparison of Saddam's regime with any other regime in the Middle East would show just how evil he was, with hundreds of thousands murdered).
262:
unless article can be brought up to NPOV which would include renaming to Human Rights in Iraq. There is hardly an indication that human rights were more respected before Saddam nor are there any that they are after Saddam
132:
428:"It was originally an article called "The Dirty Dozen" which was a made up term nobody uses and gives no sources for such a term." It fgives the sources, and any number of news stories could be added.
118:
words. It also not a person, place, thing, or specific event requiring an entry into an encyclopedia. It is also redundant, and serves no purpose. It is basically an article for original research.
52:
83:
78:
87:
70:
110:
387:
This isn't the place for political discussion. As for the article? It doesn't have proof of what it claims. Amnesty
International style condemnations are unencyclopaedic.
425:'"makes many claims not atributable to anyone" -- Yes, section 1 does need specific sources for every allegation. But they are finadable, so not a reason for deletion.
294:
Until someone wants to sort out the whole "Human rights in Iraq" series of articles mess by doing some proper research and reliable sourcing, it should be deleted.
572:, amnesty for those imprisoned, the rights of Kurds to their language being official in Kurdish areas (In Turkey, the Kurdish language is illegal), etc. --
74:
450:"It also violates guidelines for living persons." Sourced reports on major newsworthy criminals are not BLP violations--but agreed, it does need sources.
419:"Speculation, original research, -- It is merely the collection of published accounts, as with all good WP articles. Calling it speculation seems POV.
475:
122:
66:
58:
588:
576:
559:
541:
525:
492:
443:
404:
391:
377:
367:
348:
334:
313:
300:
281:
269:
252:
240:
227:
200:
187:
175:
155:
139:
49:
152:
147:
All are good reasons to keep working on the article, none are good reason's for deletion. Every country has an article on human rights
520:
222:
196:
There are obvious attempts to make this more encyclopedic. Important subject worthy of coverage and this article is getting there.
148:
17:
459:"It is also redundant," apparently meaning the subject is treated elsewhere. But a collected article of this sort makes sense.
163:. What the article was previously named is of little importance. Better to put such an obviously important topic on
309:
human rights in SH's Iraq to rights in other Arab/Muslim countries of the time might be instructive, for instance.
183:- Give it some time, looks like there is a good faith effort here to add reputable secondary sourced citations...
603:
36:
602:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
436:
422:"non-encyclopedic" also POV -- its a subject of general interest about which factual material can be found.
462:"and serves no purpose. It is basically an article for original research" All said before, and all wrong.
516:
400:
Persian Empire, or any other article about human rights in any other leader leader's country article. --
218:
569:
534:
507:
485:
278:
209:
555:
No good reasons to delete. Lots of problems means lots of fixing. The subject is very important.
489:
331:
197:
172:
248:
but merge with the other two human rights in Iraq articles to one article, as per Sa.vakilian --
374:
310:
264:
249:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
538:
512:
440:
401:
214:
119:
432:
388:
237:
556:
585:
327:
297:
168:
164:
136:
573:
364:
345:
506:
This article is not OR anymore and it's important enough to keep it separate from
104:
184:
453:" Also uses weasel words." Thats about the opposite of the previous reason.
471:
151:. The big ones are broken down into smaller articles like this one is. --
292:
Valid topic, obviously, but poorly handled. Pitifully few references.
596:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
510:
as a sub-article. We can put a summary of this article there.--
412:
Most of the reasons given for deletion are patently invalid:
208:
Instead of deletion there should be a main article about
167:
than resort to deletion because it has some problems. --
277:
per Alf
Photoman. The text is also collection pure OR.
100:
96:
92:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
212:and this article can be one of its sub-article. --
606:). No further edits should be made to this page.
533:Now, I think this article should be merged into
488:. Don't need to divide up articles like this.--
8:
296:Looks like the mess is being sorted. --
67:Human rights in Saddam Hussein's Iraq
59:Human rights in Saddam Hussein's Iraq
7:
24:
149:Category:Human rights by country
133:Human rights in pre-Saddam Iraq
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
153:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )
50:Can't sleep, clown will eat me
1:
439:, see no article about it) --
288:Delete but allow recreation
161:Keep, cleanup and reference
135:from a couple of days ago.
623:
589:22:56, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
577:04:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
560:09:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
542:20:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
526:04:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
493:04:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
476:22:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
444:00:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
405:22:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
392:16:01, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
378:05:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
368:01:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
349:16:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
335:09:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
314:19:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
301:15:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
282:14:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
270:13:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
253:13:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
241:11:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
228:10:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
201:09:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
188:07:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
176:04:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
156:01:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
140:01:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
123:01:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
53:01:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
431:It mentions a book about
599:Please do not modify it.
236:is quite inappropriate.
32:Please do not modify it.
131:we also have an AfD on
437:The Imperialist Regime
535:Human rights in Iraq
508:Human rights in Iraq
486:Human rights in Iraq
210:Human rights in Iraq
57:
584:No reason not to.
145:Keep and reference
433:"The Dirty Dozen"
290:Keep but clean-up
614:
601:
524:
267:
226:
108:
90:
34:
622:
621:
617:
616:
615:
613:
612:
611:
610:
604:deletion review
597:
511:
279:Pavel Vozenilek
265:
213:
81:
65:
62:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
620:
618:
609:
608:
592:
591:
579:
562:
549:
548:
547:
546:
545:
544:
528:
496:
495:
466:
465:
464:
463:
460:
457:
454:
451:
448:
447:
446:
426:
423:
420:
414:
413:
407:
394:
382:
381:
380:
356:
355:
354:
353:
352:
351:
338:
337:
317:
316:
303:
284:
272:
256:
255:
243:
230:
203:
191:
178:
158:
142:
115:
114:
61:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
619:
607:
605:
600:
594:
593:
590:
587:
583:
580:
578:
575:
571:
566:
563:
561:
558:
554:
551:
550:
543:
540:
536:
532:
529:
527:
522:
518:
514:
509:
505:
502:
501:
500:
499:
498:
497:
494:
491:
487:
483:
480:
479:
478:
477:
474:
473:
461:
458:
455:
452:
449:
445:
442:
438:
434:
430:
429:
427:
424:
421:
418:
417:
416:
415:
411:
408:
406:
403:
398:
395:
393:
390:
386:
383:
379:
376:
371:
370:
369:
366:
361:
358:
357:
350:
347:
342:
341:
340:
339:
336:
333:
329:
324:
321:
320:
319:
318:
315:
312:
307:
304:
302:
299:
295:
291:
289:
285:
283:
280:
276:
273:
271:
268:
261:
258:
257:
254:
251:
247:
244:
242:
239:
234:
231:
229:
224:
220:
216:
211:
207:
204:
202:
199:
198:StuartDouglas
195:
192:
189:
186:
182:
179:
177:
174:
170:
166:
162:
159:
157:
154:
150:
146:
143:
141:
138:
134:
130:
127:
126:
125:
124:
121:
112:
106:
102:
98:
94:
89:
85:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
63:
60:
55:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
598:
595:
581:
570:constitution
564:
552:
530:
503:
481:
470:
467:
409:
396:
384:
375:Brianyoumans
359:
322:
311:Brianyoumans
305:
293:
287:
286:
274:
259:
250:Martin Wisse
245:
232:
205:
193:
180:
160:
144:
128:
116:
45:
43:
31:
28:
539:Jfrascencio
513:Sa.vakilian
441:Jfrascencio
402:Jfrascencio
215:Sa.vakilian
120:Jfrascencio
389:Suriel1981
238:Suriel1981
557:SmokeyJoe
490:Sefringle
410:Weak Keep
586:Robbskey
328:Dhartung
298:Folantin
169:Dhartung
137:FiggyBee
111:View log
574:Lft6771
565:Comment
531:Comment
504:Comment
469:one./
397:Comment
385:Comment
365:Noroton
346:Noroton
323:Comment
233:Comment
129:Comment
84:protect
79:history
275:Delete
260:Delete
165:WP:AID
88:delete
482:Merge
105:views
97:watch
93:links
16:<
582:Keep
553:Keep
360:Keep
332:Talk
306:Keep
246:Keep
206:Keep
194:Keep
185:Smee
181:Keep
173:Talk
101:logs
75:talk
71:edit
46:keep
484:to
472:DGG
266:Alf
109:– (
330:|
171:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
77:|
73:|
48:.
523:)
521:c
519:-
517:t
515:(
225:)
223:c
221:-
219:t
217:(
190:.
113:)
107:)
69:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.