Template talk:Segregation

This template is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles

Discrimination

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. Parts of this page relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:

You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.

Further information

The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:

Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.

With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:

Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

[untitled section]

First, the word Segregation should be wikilinked. Second, Japanese internment shouldn't be included unless you include every other example of internment from the List of concentration and internment camps. TheMightyQuill 17:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll add that link. You should bring up your concern about internment at the

Discrimination2 template too. I inculded Japanese internment because it was on that template. I'm not an expert in that area. futurebird 17:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear. I didn't wikilink becuase to get to the three kinds of segragation I wanted to inculde you need to go to the disambig page. Do you have an suggestions for a better way to link? Maybe, it could just be a template on Racial Segregation... futurebird 17:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should add a few more events similar to the ones in the side box already. I edited it, so hopefully, they'll be added. User:Javanick28 17:01, 18 April 2007

Israeli apartheid is a form of segregation

Hence, it deserves inclusion in the template.--Kirby♥time 03:57, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let it be noted that Israeli apartheid is a redirect. The actual article is named Allegations of Israeli apartheid. Is is customary to include redirects in templates?? Andyvphil 19:43, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. Allegations of Israeli apartheid is only politics. Segregation is racism. Adding this category is a mockery of segregation, which is when African Americans were discriminated against in the hands of the racists of America. This does not compare to anything Israel did. Segregation is racism, and adding this category is like saying it is just politics.--Sefringle 04:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. The treatment of the Palestinians under Israeli rule is racist apartheid segregation. Your denial of the racist treatment of Palestinians is not acceptable; and furthermore, you say it is racist (towards who???) to even claim that Palestinians are mistreated!--Kirby♥time 04:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thats not racism, its retaliation. For all the suicide bombings of Hamas and Hizbollah, and those other Palestinians preform against Israel, and for nothing other than some building they call the Dome of the Rock, it is almost justified. There should almost be an article called Palestinian apartheid, because it is very similar. This is not racism, it is war. War alone is not racism. --Sefringle 04:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

War can involve racism, Gook, sandnigger.--Kirby♥time 04:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But war alone is not racism. The Arab-Israeli conflict is not a war of racism, or if it is, it can easily be argued that calling the actions of Israel "apartheid" is an act of antisemitism.--Sefringle 04:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arab-Israeli conflict is not being included in this template; Israeli apartheid is. There is a difference between racism by Israeli legislators towards Palestinians versus the terrorist actions of the IDF.--Kirby♥time 04:37, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli apartheid is just labeling the actions of Israel in the Arab-Israeli conflict as a form of racism, and completely ignoring the actions of the Palestinians. Casualties during war are not necessarily racist in nature. Unlike the actions of Palestinian terrorists, where they are clearly targeting Jews.--Sefringle 04:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The "Jews" they are targeting are part of the Israeli armed forces. Since when is it racist to kill members of a country's armed forces? And don't try to say that they are "civilians". Every single Israeli citizen is required to join the IDF, so evey single one is a potential murderer/terrorist and the killing is justified, not racist.--Kirby♥time 05:16, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh really!? So the Haifa bus 37 massacre, the Jerusalem bus 20 massacre, the Matza restaurant massacre, Passover massacre, Ben Yehuda Street Bombing etc. were all attacks on armed forces. Is that what you are saying? Your arguement that there are no Israeli civilians goes both ways. Every Palestinian is a potential suicide bomber, and their killings are not justified; they outright border on antisemitism.--Sefringle 05:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those are all legitimate attacks on military personnel. And wrong, not all Palestinians aren't potential suicide bombers, because they aren't required by law, unlike Israelis. --Kirby♥time 05:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All Israelies are not soldiers. This is getting really stupid and offensive, so I'm done debating this.--Sefringle 05:42, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kirby, thats a new one from you. After you denied the holocuast saying its "alledged" to have happenned, you are now saying that suicide attacks are justified.--Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 05:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable

It's too US-centric. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.122.228.186 (talk) 23:42, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

White Australia Policy

The white Australia policy was not racial segregation, according to the definition given by the page on racial segregation. If there is a template for racist policy you might include it there, but since it's not technically racial segregation it shouldn't be here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.207.7.118 (talk) 05:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The UK

I mean there is a lot of racism in the UK, help me develop that section.Mangokeylime (talk) 20:27, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

changing title of artical

I belive artical should be changed to apaethide on south africia because this is the main focoyse of the articial I belive that the aparthide articial should include information on sout africia definition of an aparthide as well as information on other apathides across the world such as atempted assimilition of canidian natives by europians Jibbyp (talk) 03:22, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I say keep the original name, but add the information. Mangokeylime (talk) 02:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moslem State Discrimination

Many Moslem led states discriminate against Christians, Jews and arguably women. 
One is not allowed to build churches, synagogues or other religions'places of worship, 
for example: Turkey, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, various Gulf states, Afghanistan and others.
As for discrimination against Jews, many Moslem states openly allow anti-semitic diatribes 
on public media (see MEMRI videos), openly praise and base their socio-political policies 
on the infamous anti-semitic Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion, viz., Hamas's constitution 
includes such references.  
Another overlooked source of discrimination has been the UN. The UN's Human Rights committee 
is comprised of openly racist, anti-semitic and dictatorial states. FOr many years the number 
of resolutions passed by this body against Israel has always exceeded those referring to the 
other 190+ UN members.    
If this template is going to reference and identify places and policies of discrimination 
then it must make this list twice as long.Diffrntd (talk) 11:58, 20 June 2019 (UTC)               
  ^[1]
  <ref> www.memri.org <ref> <ref>www.GatestoneInstitute.org<ref>[reply]

^ Huffpost Jan 4, 2018, "Shame: 10 ways Israel Is Treated Differently"

[1] Huffpost Jan 4, 2018, "Shame: 10 ways Israel Is Treated Differently"

[1]