Jump to content

Talk:Women's rights in Iraq

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

Comments

[edit]

I don't think that this page meets in any way Wikipedia publication standards, as to style, content and references —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.205.125.7 (talk) 11:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I can't think of any article about a serious topic that so signally fails to meet our criteria. I will bring it to the attention of some relevant fora.BrainyBabe (talk) 18:31, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why hasn't this article been removed? It has been over four years since the people above me commented, yet it is very clear that little has been done to improve its quality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.144.14.136 (talk) 03:44, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably the worst wiki page I've ever seen

[edit]

It's full of obviously false claims, stereotypes, unsourced data and misrepresentation. This should be taken down immediately.

It claims that the Taliban took over Iraq, for crying out loud. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.232.88.52 (talk) 01:49, 26 May 2010 (UTC) WHat a terrible article. As an Iraqi, I was horrified to see this article which is full of obviously false claims as well as clear bias. It is clear the writer has never visited Iraq and probably never even met an Iraqi! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.78.234 (talk) 23:37, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Politics and Education

[edit]

This article does not properly or correctly address Iraqi women's rights in many areas, but especially in politics and education. It is almost as though the author is speaking only of one particular city or village in Iraq, or is making this information up.

By visiting the official website of the Iraqi Parliament, one can find that many women are members of parliament and are members of many working committees in the parliament.

By visiting UNESCO's official update on Education in Iraq (2011), one can find that in 2008 there were: 607 kindergarten schools (and 198 in Kurdistan) 12,507 primary schools according to Iraqi Central Organization for Statistics, but UNESCO put that number at over 17,500. 4,364 secondary schools according to Iraqi Central Organization for Statistics, and 5,409 according to UNESCO

And according to the Central Organization of Statistics: Female enrollment in primary school in 2008 was 44.6% of the student population Female enrollment in secondary school in 2008 was 42% of the student population

There are over 17,000 schools (not including Higher Education) in Iraq according to two official sources so this article's claim that there are only 1,000 schools in Iraq is not only false, but it is extremely inappropriate considering it has no source.

As for the author's "facts" of marriage in Iraq, it appears more that they are quoting generalized customs attributed to a version of Islamic marriage (again, not providing appropriate sources), and not actual Iraqi traditions or statistics. The claim that Iraqi women are "forbidden" to marry non-Iraqi men is false. According to the US Embassy Baghdad, such marriages are legal. One simple example would be from the 2007 Newsweek article: Few Battlefield Romances From Iraq. The first subject of the article is a married couple where the wife is an Iraqi woman and the husband an American man). The author provides an example from 2008, but it is clear that this course addresses cultural issues around love and not laws about marriage. Maybe the author should have addressed this in a section titled "Cultural Issues Pertaining to love and courtship".

Divorce is not a "modern" practice in Iraq as the author has stated, and appears to be taken out of context from the source that is provided. The article does not appropriately cover the laws granted to women in Iraq relevant to divorce. A somewhat outdated (1994) summary of these laws can be found in English on the official website of the Emry School of Law.

In general, this article was unintelligent and lacked credibility. It should be removed without debate or further consideration based on the more official and accurate sources that I have provided in support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.17.252.224 (talk) 05:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]