Talk:Allegations of apartheid/Archive 1

message: If anything, this article should be deleted. It's nothing more than an oppourtunity for nations to be insulted by "left-wing liberal anti-imperialist nuts", using poor comparisons to Apartheid. I think Racial segregation would be a much better article than what is here. - michaelg 07:01, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Right.  Essentially, "It's appropriate to insult everyone else [about whom you really don't know anything, but think you do], but wholly inexcusable to insult Australia", right?  Gimme a break.  The "left-wing nuts" are certainly responsible for doing the insulting, I agree, but that doesn't mean that they're not insulting Australia as well.  Until you can demonstrate that they're not, the Australia section stands.  Since the criteria are so flimsy for inclusion, in fact, a great many more countries should be added to the list.  Chile, China, France, Sudan, and Zimbabwe come to mind off the top of my head...  Tomer TALK  17:24, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion

message: Hey, what about India?
7000 years ago, when the Indo-Europeans/Aryans first arrived in India, the Drivindian Caucasians were not "untouchable". Is not the caste system a very old (+5000 years) form of apartheid? Huh? Tebello Thejane (ZyXoas)
Dravidians and "Caucasoid Aryans" are two separate groups. The theory that India was invaded by some long-gone proto-Europeans is certainly a hotly debated one, and recent archeaological evidence suggest it may at least be partially wrong. I don't really think India qualifies for apartheid. There is a system of oppression of the Harijans. If you believe otherwise, feel free to add a section to this article that states so, with evidence, of course.
Vvuppala 09:13, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: India?

message: This is where we can put all our dirt on every other country, for eventual inclusion in this tramp article  Tomer TALK  17:51, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You have to be kidding, right? These countries? Apartheid? Where's the specific government policies to keep differing ethnic groups racially segregated? These countries are letting the immigrants (of whatever colour, race, background) in! Same goes with your attack on Australia. This article is a joke. Cheers, -   >>michaelg | talk 00:52, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad we're on the same page then.    Next time you nominate this piece of unspeakable crap for deletion, maybe now you'll consider letting me know.  Tomer TALK  07:08, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  dump section 

message: hahah, as requested, france is now included in the article.. but because of html apartheid, is hidden, only visible in edit mode. so sad.
in all seriousness, i added a commented out stub explaining the accusations of apartheid that came out of the paris riotsVvuppala 13:39, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[France]]

message: :You have to be kidding, right? These countries? Apartheid? Where's the specific government policies to keep differing ethnic groups racially segregated? These countries are letting the immigrants (of whatever colour, race, background) in! Same goes with your attack on Australia. This article is a joke. Cheers, -   >>michaelg | talk 00:52, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm glad we're on the same page then.    Next time you nominate this piece of unspeakable crap for deletion, maybe now you'll consider letting me know.  Tomer TALK  07:08, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[United Kingdom]]

message: I have once again reverted the deletion of the Australia section.  While I think the entire article is of dubious scholarly [or other] merit, I have well-sourced the Australia section, and until the lead text of the article itself is changed, removing it constitutes nothing short of vandalism.  Tomer TALK  07:15, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Pro-Australia POV-pushing reverts

message: I got to thinking about the Israel stub. Why is the occupation of Gaza there? After both sides accepted a two-state solution, there is nothing about that situation which makes it apartheid. The only apartheid in Israel is the treatment of Israeli Arabs as second-class citizens. Israel's treatment of Palestinians in Gaza falls outside the scope of this article. The topic of Israel's occupation of Gaza and the West Bank has been extensively covered in other articles-  Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Al-Aqsa Intifada Gaza Strip
:You can't just make up your own opinions about what you think "Israeli apartheid" is; instead you have to properly quote sources which actually refer to it.  This is Wikipedia policy, and no-one is exempt. Please review WP:CITE, WP:NOR, and WP:NPOV. Jayjg (talk) 23:15, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: And please make sure any sources you do cite are encyclopedic, and discuss "Israeli apartheid". Jayjg (talk) 23:22, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Israeli occupation