Talk:Human rights in Kuwait

Katherine Phillips incident

I was surprised at the weight this article gives to Katherine Phillips, a US teacher who suffered a one-month travel ban after suspending a student. I've been bold and removed this section for now, as no human rights organizations appeared to be involved, and none of the linked reliable sources appeared to discuss it as a human rights issue. Given that the scope of this article covers fifty+ years of Kuwaiti history on human rights, I don't think this incident is significant enough to merit the lengthy treatment it received here per WP:UNDUE. If others feel differently, however, I'm glad to discuss further. Cheers, Khazar2 (talk) 21:21, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

2008 Kuwaiti Ministry of Communication directive to Kuwaiti ISPs to block YouTube

At 17:36 on 7 June 2013 IP 80.184.81.72 deleted material related to the 2008 blocking of YouTube from the Intrnet Freedom section of the article, giving an edit summary of "It is very unnecessary to mention the calls, none of these calls' led to the blocking of Youtube and stricter restrictions on online content, talk is talk. Plenty of MPs talk but nothing ever happened, no law was pressed, no changes were made." The deleted material read:

In response to several videos declared "offensive to Muslims", Kuwaiti authorities called for the blocking of YouTube and several Kuwaiti Members of Parliament called for stricter restrictions on online content.

Following this deletion there was no mention of YouTube anywhere in the article. The edit was one of six made to the article by IP 80.184.81.72 on 7 June, several of which seemed to soften material in the article that was critical of the Human Rights situation in Kuwait. The deletion of the YouTube material was the only edit that gave an edit summary.

At 21:51 on 7 June 2013 I restored the deleted material with an edit summary of "restore reworded information about the September 2008 order to block YouTube". The URL to the Kuwait Times article was a dead link and I replaced it with a URL to another copy of the story on blogspot.com. The restored material read:

In September 2008 in response to several videos declared "offensive to Muslims", the Kuwaiti Ministry of Communication directed Kuwaiti ISPs to block YouTube.

At 10:55 on 8 June 2013 IP 80.184.81.72 again removed the material with an edit summary of "Unreliable source from a blog site that lacks any degree of merit. Blogs aren't reliable sources. Youtube is not blocked in Kuwait."

I disagree with the explanation given in the edit summary. The reference was and remained to an article that appeared in the Kuwait Times which we assume is a reliable source. The blog is just a working location for the story given that the URL for the Kuwait Times no longer works. It is not the case that all blogs are considered unreliable sources, it depends on the blog and the context in which the blog is being referenced. And the material isn't saying that YouTube is blocked in Kuwait now, but rather that the "Ministry of Communication directed Kuwaiti ISPs to block YouTube" in 2008.

At 12:58 on 8 June 2013 I restored the material with an edit summary of "Undid revision 558916447 by 80.184.81.72 (talk) restore and expand deleted material on 2008 YouTube blocking. See talk page before deleting this material again.". The restored and expanded material now reads:

In September 2008 in response to several videos declared "offensive to Muslims", the Kuwaiti Ministry of Communication directed Kuwaiti ISPs to block YouTube. However, as of July 2009, YouTube was accessible in Kuwait.

Based on the materials in the references, I believe that the Kuwaiti Ministry of Communication did direct Kuwaiti ISPs to block YouTube in 2008 and that some or even all of the ISPs did block YouTube for a period of time. I believe that this material should remain part of the article. If there are problems with the references, we should fix them rather than deleting all mention of this incident from the article. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 17:39, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Human rights in Kuwait. 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/20120318015657/http://survey07.ituc-csi.org/getcountry.php?IDCountry=KWT&IDLang=EN to http://survey07.ituc-csi.org/getcountry.php?IDCountry=KWT&IDLang=EN

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:21, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Teachers section is weirdly written

See title DemonDays64 (talk) 15:13, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Deletions

Some editor in Kuwait has made mass deletions best described as IDONTLIKEIT clothed in SOIWILLCLAIMUNDUEWEIGHT. That is not appropriate. This is clearly both relevant and not undue weight. --2603:7000:2143:8500:1954:9913:1F59:443C (talk) 05:16, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

The citations to ohchr.org are press releases, and that makes them primary sources. I agree that they are undue weight. Elizium23 (talk) 05:23, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

The weforum.org citation looks reliable for these claims. Elizium23 (talk) 05:26, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

ohchr.org is used as a ref hundreds of times. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=%22ohchr.org%22&title=Special:Search&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1

primary sources that have been reputably published may be used in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them.

--2603:7000:2143:8500:1954:9913:1F59:443C (talk) 06:06, 17 June 2021 (UTC)

Criticism of the emir

Shouldn't we add that someone can be tried and fined thousands of dollars if they criticize the emir of Kuwait on social media (even in a lighthearted manner)? 98.123.38.211 (talk) 22:46, 8 August 2024 (UTC)