Talk:About–Picard law

message: Note: text was moved "as-is" from Cult#France. A summary was created there and wikilink to here.--Zappaz 18:58, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I think that indeed we should let the facts speak for themselves.
* There is, one the one hand, the cited point of view that the French government repressed unduly the expression of Falun Gong and Tibetan demonstrators, and that this shows that the French government is an accomplice of the repression that China wages on Falun Gong and Tibet.
* On the other hand, it is also a demonstrable fact that the same kind of security measures was implemented against anti-Bush demonstrators, while France was at odds with the US.
We can of course let the reader make his or her deduction from this point. But I do not think that it is neutral to cite allegations while not providing factual context.
Similarly, it was alleged that the French government cracks down on Falun Gong. On the other hand, it is a fact that Falun Gong freely demonstrates in Paris in all places where there is a Chinese community. David.Monniaux 16:56, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Perspective on the measures wrt China 

message: I removed:
This is not so different from most other democratic governments, but the French took it a step further, insisting that citizens have no officially sanctioned ethnic or religious identity. Such a viewpoint is arguably non-discriminatory or, more precisely, equi-discriminatory. Yet societal stress on forced homogeneity, coupled with the exclusion of religious symbols and practices from all public places and discourse, led to feelings of oppression by people of faith within France.
Sounds like an extract from a social science essay. This is clearly opinion, at least to some significant extent. As such, it should be attributed. David.Monniaux 20:39, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broad opinion 

message: Critics requested the dissolution of the MILS as its very purpose, "to fight against sects," is an affront to the French Constitution which guarantees the religious neutrality of the State and the principle of separation of Church and State. They also argued that there is a need to repeal of any discriminatory law containing the word "cult," "sect," "cultic," or "sectarian" as laws should not specify groups as "sectarian" or "cultic" as, in a democracy, all individuals and groups should be treated equally and in the same manner.
Which critics said so? Which laws specify which groups as sectarian? David.Monniaux 20:46, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which critics? 

message: I looked up the ECHR case database and added references to the relevant cases. David.Monniaux 15:27, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  ECHR 

message: Previous title was inherently POV. New title, based on the full title of the About-Picaard law "French legislation for the prevention and repression of cultic groups" is more appropriate and NPOV. --Zappaz 04:04, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: an even more NPOV name would be "French legislation for the prevention and repression of cultic groups that break human rights and fundamental rights" Andries 18:23, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

text: It's short and neutral, but (1) somewhat obscure, and (2) the article covers vastly more than just Law 2001-504. I think #3 above is more accurate and useful.  --MCB 06:28, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The content besides About-Picard law is not about legislation but other activities and their critique, so that title isn't really accurate either. --Irmgard 09:31, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name 

message: From the first look, the article gave the impression that there had been many parties very concerned about entering their specific POV without any regard for the article as a whole. Also the part about government and religion was very much written from an US view without considering history and present of France. I rewrote this part almost completely and moved some texts which belong further down. 
I also added quite some points on the government activities - Vivien report, contents of Gest-Guyard report (yes, it has some contents besides the cult list in the appendix).
There is something more needed about the MILS except that Vivien was criticized.
I will also go over the critique part, and condense it to specific points criticized and relevant parties. In the end a summary para of who else has "been against it" without specifics. 
And I'll add some positive views from France and abroad as well. Irmgard 07:09, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article needs attention 

message: The Background section contains this text:
:These organisations were perceived to isolate recruits from their families and friends, and to exploit them, which caused complaints from many families.
The text needs to be attributed to someone. (Perceived by whom?).
Also, "Problems with new reigions" is POV. We need a better section name. --ZappaZ  19:35, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perceived by the families. --Irmgard 22:15, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good try, Irmagard, but not good enough. Deleted. Also deleted the text that is unattributed. If it is in the references, please provide a link to whcich reference. Deleted as well. --ZappaZ  18:07, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Background 

message: Section added to and partially rewritten according to the actual text of the law. 
All critique and third party comments moved to reactions.
Several in-text references deleted, because they did not say anything relevant about the point in question. (e.g. mentioning one leftist politician in connection with the law is no evidence for the claim that the law was made by leftists). I did put instead the actual government at the time into the paragraph. --Irmgard 22:15, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: About-Picard Law

message: Just finished a copyedit of the article.  Of course if you disagree with the edits I made feel free, it is a free encyclopedia after all, I have no pride in ownership.  I edited for spelling, grammar, word usage, sentence structure, etc. but not for content.  Although I was tempted when I got to the reactions section.  That whole section seems POV to me.  How do NGO and U.S. government reactions contribute to an encyclopedic article about a French law?  I can't see that they do.  Is there someone out there that can put up a persuasive argument why this section is NPOV as well as how it contributes to the broader understanding of the law itself?  --Easter Monkey 09:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reaction section 

message: The first thing when discussing a legal text is to read it. There is little question of interpretation about what this law discusses and does not discuss. There is no point, on such issues, on "leaving interpretation to the reader" or in citing the opinions of people on the topic.
(Just to make sure I'm not misunderstood: we can discuss possible aims or goals of the law that are not apparent in the text. Discussion of these is, by nature, conjectural, and we can validly reflect the various opinions on the issue.)
A similar phenomenon occured on French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools: people were saying that the law was an amendment on the "loi sur la laïcité" — no such "loi sur la laïcité" exists, and the first sentence on the law discussed in the article said that it amended the code of education...
David.Monniaux 20:53, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stick to facts 

message: This article is about the About-Picard law. General issues regarding religious liberty in France belong into the article Status of religious freedom in France, not here. I removed one section re relations to China and one re visit of Chinese president which are both not directly related to the About-Picard law. Both points are taken up in the religious freedom article. --Irmgard 19:44, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stay on topic 

message: Why was the whole text on the chronology of the anti-cult report by the MILS gone? Why it was deleted? Irmgard? --ZappaZ  15:46, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is the text about MILS? 

message: Since we now have this article and another on religious freedom in France, matters not directly related to the About-Picard law (such as allegations about MILS) should go to the other article. Otherwise, we'll end up having two copies of the same article! David.Monniaux 22:01, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It was in the original move but it got changed somewhere during the edits. --Irmgard 17:47, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article split 

message: In the "Application of the law" section is a reference to a fine denominated in French francs.  But the fine was imposed in 2004, after France's adoption of the euro in place of the franc.  LeoO3 15:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fine in francs ... in 2004? 

message: I assert this article has a bias.  It seems excessively long and almost like a promotion of the Law. I intend to do work to clean it up. Elmmapleoakpine (talk) 23:58, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article has a POV problem 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on About-Picard law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051219055614/http://assembly.coe.int:80/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc05/EDOC10470.htm to http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc05/EDOC10470.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050504010205/http://www.ihf-hr.org:80/viewbinary/viewhtml.php?doc_id=1797 to http://www.ihf-hr.org/viewbinary/viewhtml.php?doc_id=1797
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:41, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on About-Picard law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc05/EDOC10470.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ihf-hr.org/viewbinary/viewhtml.php?doc_id=1797
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://lesrapports.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/cgi-bin/brp/telestats.cgi?brp_ref=044000121&brp_file=0000.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050829002758/http://www.brookings.edu/fp/cuse/analysis/relfreedom.htm to http://www.brookings.edu/fp/cuse/analysis/relfreedom.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050408113321/http://www.miviludes.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Introduction_rapport_MIVILUDES_2003.pdf to http://www.miviludes.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Introduction_rapport_MIVILUDES_2003.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050317074845/http://www.miviludes.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Report_MIVILUDES_2003.pdf to http://www.miviludes.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/Report_MIVILUDES_2003.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051029012222/http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=http%3A%2F%2Fassembly.coe.int%2FDocuments%2FAdoptedText%2Fta99%2FEREC1412.htm to http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=http%3A%2F%2Fassembly.coe.int%2FDocuments%2FAdoptedText%2FTA99%2FEREC1412.HTM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060118091117/http://www.ihf-hr.org/documents/index.php?s_topic=10&s_countries%5B%5D=75&s_doctype=0&sec_id=3&submit=1&s_year=&s_keyword=&x=0&y=0 to http://www.ihf-hr.org/documents/index.php?s_topic=10&s_countries%5B%5D=75&s_doctype=0&sec_id=3&submit=1&s_year=&s_keyword=&x=0&y=0
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:40, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on About-Picard law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.religionandpolicy.org/show.php?p=1.1.105
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050208022636/http://www.assemblee-nat.fr/rapports/r2472.asp to http://www.assemblee-nat.fr/rapports/r2472.asp
*Added  tag to http://lesrapports.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/cgi-bin/brp/telestats.cgi?brp_ref=054000210&brp_file=0000.pdf
*Added  tag to http://lesrapports.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/cgi-bin/brp/telestats.cgi?brp_ref=054000210&brp_file=0000.rtf
*Added  tag to http://lesrapports.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/cgi-bin/brp/telestats.cgi?brp_ref=044000035&brp_file=0000.pdf
*Added  tag to http://lesrapports.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/cgi-bin/brp/telestats.cgi?brp_ref=024000086&brp_file=0000.pdf
*Added  tag to http://lesrapports.ladocumentationfrancaise.fr/cgi-bin/brp/telestats.cgi?brp_ref=024000086&brp_file=0000.rtf
*Added  tag to http://www.religionandpolicy.org/show.php?p=1.1.105
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051029012222/http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=http%3A%2F%2Fassembly.coe.int%2FDocuments%2FAdoptedText%2Fta99%2FEREC1412.htm to http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=http%3A%2F%2Fassembly.coe.int%2FDocuments%2FAdoptedText%2FTA99%2FEREC1412.HTM
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050220032441/http://www.ldh-france.org/actu_nationale.cfm?idactu=253 to http://www.ldh-france.org/actu_nationale.cfm?idactu=253
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050320105410/http://www.humanrightsandtolerance.org/francereport.html to http://www.humanrightsandtolerance.org/francereport.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:08, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on About-Picard law. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303193106/http://www.antisectes.net/monde-usa.htm to http://www.antisectes.net/monde-usa.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051029012222/http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=http%3A%2F%2Fassembly.coe.int%2FDocuments%2FAdoptedText%2Fta99%2FEREC1412.htm to http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=http%3A%2F%2Fassembly.coe.int%2FDocuments%2FAdoptedText%2FTA99%2FEREC1412.HTM
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:30, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified