![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Archive of discussion prior to May 2011
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 February 2020 and 8 May 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Gudari.Castillo,
Sjsua2020.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 September 2020 and 21 December 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Niyeze,
Tjmorg,
Thitikarn Chinpattanakul.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 October 2020 and 29 November 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Ochung,
Ryoma Masutani,
Mtimande Zamangwane. Peer reviewers:
Ryoma Masutani.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I have begun to improve the article by removing unsourced statements, reflections and opinions, as well as doing some housekeeping (e.g. repairing broken links, bringing lists in alphabetical order etc.). More work clearly needs to be done. The structure could certainly be improved, although I am not yet quite sure how to best do this. A clarification about what is included in water privatization and what probably not (e.g. bottled water, markets for water rights) could also be useful, although there may be no consensus on where to draw the boundaries. I am also planning to add a table with all the 30 or so countries that currently have private water concessions or similar contracts, which I hope will be useful. Keeping a neutral point of view is extremely important and any constructive, good-faith advice on how to ensure this on such a controversial topic is welcome. Finally, I would suggest to remove the country sections and refer the reader to the respective country-specific articles on water privatization.-- Mschiffler ( talk) 23:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Even though I feel like the Example of water privatization section need a lot more works to be done, I still see the benefit of why we should keep it here. The section gives a nice overview of how water privatization look like in countries around the world. If the readers wish to learn more about water privatization in each countries or other countries that are not included in this section, they now know the keywords to search for it in Wikipedia. Therefore, I strongly suggest we should keep this section. In addition, I think what lack in this section is the example of an African country. I found nice information about private sachet water in Ghana and Nigeria. I will consider add it onto the page. Thitikarn Chinpattanakul ( talk) 23:22, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
I propose a revision of the following type.
Editing of sections (8.1) will expand the section to include descriptions of
women's restriction of access to water related to privatization. In the literature
this issue relates to both physical distance problems, as well as social discrimi-
nation regarding priority access to water supplies.
Section (8.2) will be expanded to include the often adverse health prob-
lems resulting from water privatization schemes, this includes, for example the
Tanzanian HIV/AIDS problem of caretakers whom often happen to be women.
Also, the literature reports on contamination and negligence relating to water
privatization issues which e�tc women's health.
I also propose adding a section under impact of privatization specific to women in developing nations, reflecting economic and social ramifications, community response, and some mention of the relation of this issue to the larger gender discourse, under some NPOV safe framework such as relevant theories or some such. Comments? Bryancraven ( talk) 18:50, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
It seems that you are quite familiar with the literature on the human right to water and sanitation, but - in case you did not know it - I would like to draw your attention to the following publication: The Human Right to Water and Sanitation. Translating Theory into Practice. Among other things, it addresses the issue of public and private service provision from a human rights perspective on the basis of the various UN resolutions on the topic.-- Mschiffler ( talk) 07:36, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Given the concerns of
violations of our neutral point of view policy raised above by numerous editors as well as my own findings while stumbling upon the article, I've gone ahead and added a {{
POV}}
tag to the top of the article and
gutted the peacock images to help get the ball rolling. --
slakr\
talk /
00:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
I encountered a surprising (to me) amount of something in this article that I haven't seen all that often on Wikipedia, especially clustered in one place — though I freely admit it's possible I simply haven't been paying attention / looking hard enough — so I wanted to bring it up here and seek guidance/consensus.
The issue, in a nutshell: A number of the entries in the References section cite works from mainstream publications (newspapers and magazines), but link to sites other than, and not affiliated with, the publication's own website. In short, unaffiliated (and possibly unauthorized) reproductions/mirrors of the cited work are apparently being used as references in the article.
Not surprisingly, many of these links are now dead links, either landing at 404 pages, or not even connecting as the entire site has gone offline.
At least the following references (and possibly more) are affected by this:
Obviously, dead links are a problem. The use of unofficial, possibly-unauthorized mirrors is therefore a concern, because it makes the source less reliable (in the technical sense) long-term, and increases the likelihood that the citations will become dead links.
But even where the source pages are still accessible, citing unofficial reproductions to a original source can be problematic because there's simply no way to be sure that the original was reproduced correctly. It's possible that the reference, despite being cited to a particular source, doesn't actually represent the source's work at all. In effect, we may be accidentally participating in a misrepresentation of our claimed source material.
I'll share an example I was personally involved with:
I'm not entirely sure of Wikipedia policy on this matter (though I intend to look into it). I don't know if using mirrored works as sources is acceptable or not. Nor do I know if citing mirrored works to their original source is actually prohibited. But I strongly feel that this should be against policy, as it's a bad practice that can be detrimental to Wikipedia's accuracy and verifiability — I think my example clearly illustrates why.
Does anyone know of any warning/cleanup templates addressing this issue, that should be applied to the article? Pointers to relevant policy would also be quite welcome. And, of course, help chasing down those sources would be great. Discussion or commentary, including (especially?) disagreement with or counterpoints to any of what I've written here, is also encouraged. (Let me amend that: respectful discussion, commentary, or disagreement encouraged.) -- FeRD_NYC ( talk) 14:14, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
However, if you know or reasonably suspect that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. An example would be linking to a site hosting the lyrics of many popular songs without permission from their copyright holders. Knowingly and intentionally directing others to a site that violates copyright has been considered a form of contributory infringement in the United States ( Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry [1]). Linking to a page that illegally distributes someone else's work sheds a bad light on Wikipedia and its editors.
I am proposing to revise the Lead section for clarity by editing sentence structure and syntax. The lead is a bit choppy and difficult to read. Additionally, I will adjust the information included in the lead to better reflect the contents of the article as a whole. I propose to revise the History section to include the role of water privatization in the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation. Any recommendations for how to edit these sections are more than welcome! Sjsua2020 ( talk) 02:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
I want to expand on the example of water privatization in France on the examples section. France is a major example of water privatization and it deserves more than two sentences. I will include information similar to the one in other examples. If someone has any suggestions or specific information they would like to see, I would greatly appreciate a response. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gudari.Castillo ( talk • contribs) 11:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
I will also be expanding on the example of water privatization in England and Wales. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gudari.Castillo ( talk • contribs) 14:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
The Impacts section lacks content and citations on the content that is there. I will add more cited content to this section to improve it. The content I will add will be from studies relating water privatization to child mortality, political ecology, and over all health impacts. Gudari.Castillo ( talk) 15:26, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
I am planning on fleshing out the motives section with some extra sentences that explain the motives behind water privatization. These motives include the conditional loans offered by the World Bank to struggling countries, the idea that a market-based approach provides monetary incentives for better management, and the necessity of privatization in some cases where governments have no public funds to repair or improve the infrastructure of water management utilities. My main sources are Community water system privatization and the water access crisis and Access to Water in the Slums of Sub‐Saharan Africa Tjmorg ( talk) 05:27, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
My group members and I have decided that the last paragraph in the lead section is out of place, and it does not contain information that adds meaning to the lead section. The numbers provided in the current paragraph does not make sense and the flow in this paragraph needs adjustments or, as my group suggests, it can be removed. Niyeze ( talk) 19:48, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I find it difficult to conclude the overall profit of water privatization since it varies in different countries. Moreover, claims and evidences in this section are very outdated. Therefore, it is not a good reference for people who want to know about profit from privatization. I suggest taking this part out. Thitikarn Chinpattanakul ( talk) 23:37, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
In the table that consists of a "list of countries with formal private sector participation in urban water supply with number and type of contracts," there is a need to revisit the table for further updates. It is worth your while as a Wikipedian editor to check out what could be added to this table if time permits. The time was short for my group, but it is crucial to point out potential areas that need improvement for future editors. Niyeze ( talk) 05:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
This article is the subject of an
educational assignment at University of Utah supported by the
Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are available
on the course page.
The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}}
by
PrimeBOT (
talk) on
16:20, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Archive of discussion prior to May 2011
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 February 2020 and 8 May 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Gudari.Castillo,
Sjsua2020.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 September 2020 and 21 December 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Niyeze,
Tjmorg,
Thitikarn Chinpattanakul.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 October 2020 and 29 November 2020. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Ochung,
Ryoma Masutani,
Mtimande Zamangwane. Peer reviewers:
Ryoma Masutani.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 12:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I have begun to improve the article by removing unsourced statements, reflections and opinions, as well as doing some housekeeping (e.g. repairing broken links, bringing lists in alphabetical order etc.). More work clearly needs to be done. The structure could certainly be improved, although I am not yet quite sure how to best do this. A clarification about what is included in water privatization and what probably not (e.g. bottled water, markets for water rights) could also be useful, although there may be no consensus on where to draw the boundaries. I am also planning to add a table with all the 30 or so countries that currently have private water concessions or similar contracts, which I hope will be useful. Keeping a neutral point of view is extremely important and any constructive, good-faith advice on how to ensure this on such a controversial topic is welcome. Finally, I would suggest to remove the country sections and refer the reader to the respective country-specific articles on water privatization.-- Mschiffler ( talk) 23:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Even though I feel like the Example of water privatization section need a lot more works to be done, I still see the benefit of why we should keep it here. The section gives a nice overview of how water privatization look like in countries around the world. If the readers wish to learn more about water privatization in each countries or other countries that are not included in this section, they now know the keywords to search for it in Wikipedia. Therefore, I strongly suggest we should keep this section. In addition, I think what lack in this section is the example of an African country. I found nice information about private sachet water in Ghana and Nigeria. I will consider add it onto the page. Thitikarn Chinpattanakul ( talk) 23:22, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
I propose a revision of the following type.
Editing of sections (8.1) will expand the section to include descriptions of
women's restriction of access to water related to privatization. In the literature
this issue relates to both physical distance problems, as well as social discrimi-
nation regarding priority access to water supplies.
Section (8.2) will be expanded to include the often adverse health prob-
lems resulting from water privatization schemes, this includes, for example the
Tanzanian HIV/AIDS problem of caretakers whom often happen to be women.
Also, the literature reports on contamination and negligence relating to water
privatization issues which e�tc women's health.
I also propose adding a section under impact of privatization specific to women in developing nations, reflecting economic and social ramifications, community response, and some mention of the relation of this issue to the larger gender discourse, under some NPOV safe framework such as relevant theories or some such. Comments? Bryancraven ( talk) 18:50, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
It seems that you are quite familiar with the literature on the human right to water and sanitation, but - in case you did not know it - I would like to draw your attention to the following publication: The Human Right to Water and Sanitation. Translating Theory into Practice. Among other things, it addresses the issue of public and private service provision from a human rights perspective on the basis of the various UN resolutions on the topic.-- Mschiffler ( talk) 07:36, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Given the concerns of
violations of our neutral point of view policy raised above by numerous editors as well as my own findings while stumbling upon the article, I've gone ahead and added a {{
POV}}
tag to the top of the article and
gutted the peacock images to help get the ball rolling. --
slakr\
talk /
00:01, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
I encountered a surprising (to me) amount of something in this article that I haven't seen all that often on Wikipedia, especially clustered in one place — though I freely admit it's possible I simply haven't been paying attention / looking hard enough — so I wanted to bring it up here and seek guidance/consensus.
The issue, in a nutshell: A number of the entries in the References section cite works from mainstream publications (newspapers and magazines), but link to sites other than, and not affiliated with, the publication's own website. In short, unaffiliated (and possibly unauthorized) reproductions/mirrors of the cited work are apparently being used as references in the article.
Not surprisingly, many of these links are now dead links, either landing at 404 pages, or not even connecting as the entire site has gone offline.
At least the following references (and possibly more) are affected by this:
Obviously, dead links are a problem. The use of unofficial, possibly-unauthorized mirrors is therefore a concern, because it makes the source less reliable (in the technical sense) long-term, and increases the likelihood that the citations will become dead links.
But even where the source pages are still accessible, citing unofficial reproductions to a original source can be problematic because there's simply no way to be sure that the original was reproduced correctly. It's possible that the reference, despite being cited to a particular source, doesn't actually represent the source's work at all. In effect, we may be accidentally participating in a misrepresentation of our claimed source material.
I'll share an example I was personally involved with:
I'm not entirely sure of Wikipedia policy on this matter (though I intend to look into it). I don't know if using mirrored works as sources is acceptable or not. Nor do I know if citing mirrored works to their original source is actually prohibited. But I strongly feel that this should be against policy, as it's a bad practice that can be detrimental to Wikipedia's accuracy and verifiability — I think my example clearly illustrates why.
Does anyone know of any warning/cleanup templates addressing this issue, that should be applied to the article? Pointers to relevant policy would also be quite welcome. And, of course, help chasing down those sources would be great. Discussion or commentary, including (especially?) disagreement with or counterpoints to any of what I've written here, is also encouraged. (Let me amend that: respectful discussion, commentary, or disagreement encouraged.) -- FeRD_NYC ( talk) 14:14, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
However, if you know or reasonably suspect that an external Web site is carrying a work in violation of the creator's copyright, do not link to that copy of the work. An example would be linking to a site hosting the lyrics of many popular songs without permission from their copyright holders. Knowingly and intentionally directing others to a site that violates copyright has been considered a form of contributory infringement in the United States ( Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry [1]). Linking to a page that illegally distributes someone else's work sheds a bad light on Wikipedia and its editors.
I am proposing to revise the Lead section for clarity by editing sentence structure and syntax. The lead is a bit choppy and difficult to read. Additionally, I will adjust the information included in the lead to better reflect the contents of the article as a whole. I propose to revise the History section to include the role of water privatization in the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation. Any recommendations for how to edit these sections are more than welcome! Sjsua2020 ( talk) 02:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
I want to expand on the example of water privatization in France on the examples section. France is a major example of water privatization and it deserves more than two sentences. I will include information similar to the one in other examples. If someone has any suggestions or specific information they would like to see, I would greatly appreciate a response. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gudari.Castillo ( talk • contribs) 11:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
I will also be expanding on the example of water privatization in England and Wales. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gudari.Castillo ( talk • contribs) 14:11, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
The Impacts section lacks content and citations on the content that is there. I will add more cited content to this section to improve it. The content I will add will be from studies relating water privatization to child mortality, political ecology, and over all health impacts. Gudari.Castillo ( talk) 15:26, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
I am planning on fleshing out the motives section with some extra sentences that explain the motives behind water privatization. These motives include the conditional loans offered by the World Bank to struggling countries, the idea that a market-based approach provides monetary incentives for better management, and the necessity of privatization in some cases where governments have no public funds to repair or improve the infrastructure of water management utilities. My main sources are Community water system privatization and the water access crisis and Access to Water in the Slums of Sub‐Saharan Africa Tjmorg ( talk) 05:27, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
My group members and I have decided that the last paragraph in the lead section is out of place, and it does not contain information that adds meaning to the lead section. The numbers provided in the current paragraph does not make sense and the flow in this paragraph needs adjustments or, as my group suggests, it can be removed. Niyeze ( talk) 19:48, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I find it difficult to conclude the overall profit of water privatization since it varies in different countries. Moreover, claims and evidences in this section are very outdated. Therefore, it is not a good reference for people who want to know about profit from privatization. I suggest taking this part out. Thitikarn Chinpattanakul ( talk) 23:37, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
In the table that consists of a "list of countries with formal private sector participation in urban water supply with number and type of contracts," there is a need to revisit the table for further updates. It is worth your while as a Wikipedian editor to check out what could be added to this table if time permits. The time was short for my group, but it is crucial to point out potential areas that need improvement for future editors. Niyeze ( talk) 05:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
This article is the subject of an
educational assignment at University of Utah supported by the
Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are available
on the course page.
The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}}
by
PrimeBOT (
talk) on
16:20, 2 January 2023 (UTC)