Talk:Canadian Union of Public Employees/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Canadian Union of Public Employees. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Israel boycott
I rewrote this section and split it away from the unrelated UN-sponsored Conference Against Racism. I fleshed out what the actual resolution said, and added two supporting positions from COSATU and the Palestinian Labor org. I also modified the CUPE National stance including the quote about their support. --Bookandcoffee 20:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Supression of debate
I attempted to add a "See Also" to Israeli apartheid, but User:IronDuke reverted it without discussion. Since the CUPE clearly referred to it in their resolution, I do not understand why a link to the relevant Wikipedia article is not a relevant "See Also", and why the page has been protected, other than to suppress dissent. -- 88.149.150.163 10:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I can't speak to your on-going conflict, but my opinion about the "See Also" is that it would be used to reference articles that are more closely related to CUPE in general, i.e. Public Services International, or List of CUPE locals, rather than information linked to a specific event. Anyone looking for more info on Israeli apartheid would be able to find it by exploring the links in the text of the section.--Bookandcoffee 10:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- I would agree, but the link in the main body of the test simply points to Apartheid, and I didn't want to change that. If a parenthetical or an adjustment of that link is better, I have no objection. -- BlindVenetian 07:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- There is also a link to Apartheid Wall, which directly addresses the issue and contains Israeli apartheid in its "See also" section - which is, IMO, a more appropriate place for it. I'm hesitant to add a direct link because my limited understanding of the term is that it can be considered quite offensive, and I'm not in a rush to assist the move towards regular use. --Bookandcoffee 14:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- I would agree, but the link in the main body of the test simply points to Apartheid, and I didn't want to change that. If a parenthetical or an adjustment of that link is better, I have no objection. -- BlindVenetian 07:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
He's a sock
Hey, Bac, thanks for your good edits and thoughtful conversation. The person you are having a dialogue with now, however, is a sock puppet which is stalking me on multiple articles. Whether you want to keep talking to it is up to you, of course, but I can tell you from long experience, you won't get very far. Cheers. IronDuke 15:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)