Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses and governments

Please see the following archives for older discussion.

• Archive 1 (2005 to 2008)

Inappropriate Tone Tag 2 Years Old

The Inappropriate tone tag on this article is over 2 years old now. I don't see any discussion of what needs to be done to improve the article's tone here or in the archive. (The archive only contains discussions about a specific paragraph that no longer seems to exist, and a merge proposal that was withdrawn.) Meanwhile, there was work done on the article in 2008 and 2009.

Does this article now qualify to have this tag removed, or should some goal be specified that would bring it into compliance? Downstrike (talk) 19:01, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Basis of Political Neutrality

I added a sentence to the end of the second paragraph, to fulfill a request made at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jehovah%27s_Witnesses#Political_neutrality_2010-03 It was suggested there that this is the appropriate article for this information. Downstrike (talk) 20:20, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Article purpose

The purpose of this article and Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses need to be better defined. There is currently quite a lot of duplication.--Jeffro77 (talk) 09:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I've had this article on a mental far-back burner for some time. IMHO, this article should discuss more than just civil liberties, although civil liberties are a worthy section. Also needed is discussion of JW beliefs, precedents, and incidents related to voting, jury duty, taxation, immigration, reporting crimes, civil service, compulsory alternate (nonmilitary) service, acceptance of political appointments, clergy-penitent privilege, relative subjection, etc. I'm not in a hurry. --AuthorityTam (talk) 21:18, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Some good ideas; some (e.g. jury duty, taxation) probably don't necessitate more than a sentence or two. Detail relating to persecution should be briefly mentioned at this article, but should mostly be farmed out to the Persecution article. Conversely, details at the Persecution article that are actually opposition rather than (i.e. without) persecution should not be at that article—where there is government opposition, that belongs at this article. ("You can't preach here" is opposition, not persecution.)

The two articles are also in my 'B'-list.--Jeffro77 (talk) 08:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Second sentence unreferenced

It says: "In many areas, government officials have praised their work in the fields of linguistic education along with disaster management relief in instances of national or international crisis."

Also, I query whether they face legal and governmental "opposition" just because they have had to face the courts over, I assume, the blood issue, freedom of speech and religion, and child custody cases. In the main, society has shown great tolerance towards Jehovah's Witnesses, even though they are quite unpopular. Seeing as I am not able to access the reference given, could a quote be given in the footnote to substantiate the claim made?

As I wrote on the talk page to the main Jehovah's Witnesses article about a year or so ago, Watchtower Society publications are not ideal to use as references because they are self-published and not referenced much by university-published books, such as Penton's. Self-published books are frowned upon by Wikipedia. I can't figure out how to access the rules at present, but I remember reading that.

Mandmelon (talk) 12:13, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I've found the rule about self-published sources. They can be used as experts on themselves, which would be the case here, so long as there are no claims made about third-parties - so the WTS publications can't be used as experts about the legal or governmental systems, unless someone else quotes them, in which case there would be a different reference to use. Also, the article cannot be primarily based on self-published sources, even if those sources satisfy all other criteria. This is because "anyone can create a website or pay to have a book published, then claim to be an expert in a certain field."

Mandmelon (talk) 12:34, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Nazi tyranny of JWs remembered

This discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Read this article from JW' official website and consider some of informations incl. book citations there to implicate in this article. A 15-minute exposé of Nazi tyranny remembered 75 years later --FakTNeviM (talk) 14:16, 21 June 2012 (UTC) Comment above is duplicated at Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses#Nazi tyranny of JWs remembered. Please discuss there.--Jeffro77 (talk) 01:02, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jehovah's Witnesses and governments. 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/20050913213927/http://www.jw-media.org/region/europe/russia/english/human_rights/rus_e0412.htm to http://www.jw-media.org/region/europe/russia/english/human_rights/rus_e0412.htm

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) 02:27, 24 November 2017 (UTC)