Talk:Human security
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Human security is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article Milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive. | ||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on January 14, 2006. The result of the discussion was No consensus. |
[edit] Don't Delete!
Human Security is a very important emerging school of thought that crosses multiple disciplinary boundaries, many of which, including development and strategic studies, are under-covered by Wikipedia. There is lots of potential here. U21/University of Hong Kong "Human Security" students will be working to expand (and properly categorize & link) this article over the next several months. Will post this Human Security assignment on Wikipedia:School and university projects page shortly. --LMCinHK 15:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Comments on the Proposed Outline
Very much looking forward to the expansion of this article which the recently posted content outline foreshadows.
That said, I'm not sure what is meant by "Human Security and Categories." Perhaps, a more concrete way to label that section would be "Freedom from Fear" vs. "Freedom from Want", at least at this stage. Moreover, should that section be posted under the "Practice of Human Security" or the "Concept of Human Security". I'm leaning towards posting it in the practice section, but could be persuaded otherwise.
Also, what about a section that focuses on "Criticisms" of the human security approach, which could elaborate on what has already been written and could link to various specific criticisms that should be written about in the practice sections of the human security article (or other articles on Wikipedia).
Finally, make sure that you link your practice topics with exisiting subject articles elsewhere in Wikipedia. Looking forward to reading more. -- LMCinHK 02:26, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- I also like the possible future development of this article, as outlined in the content list. Like LMCinHK, I'm not sure what "Human Security and Categories" means. But I very much like the "Historical Development" as well as the "Relationships". Also, there should be a section including different approaches to establish basic pillars of the concept of HS, like, next to freedom from want and freedom from fear the proposed freedom from hazard impacts (by Hans Günter Brauch from the United Nations University) or Kofi Annan's guarantee for future generations to inherit a healthy environment.
- In addition, to me it is yet unclear how the "Practice of HS" parts should be filled. Is this supposed to be statements about threats to HS, or interactions between HS and the mentioned phenomena like global warming? Or does this include scientific practice, like the difference between a narrow and a broad definition used by the Human Security Centre in its Human Security Report? I would think this all fits better into a "Conzeptualization of HS" section.
- Anyway, these are just some thoughts that came up my mind, I already like to see the article evolving :) Hardern 08:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
- It's not necessary to include "Human Security" in all the section headers. Also note Wikipedia's capitalization:
- 1 Concept
- 1.1 ?
- 1.2 Historical development
- 1.3 Relationship with traditional security
- 1.4 Relationship with development studies
- 1 Concept
- etc.. -- Jeandré, 2006-04-21t18:49z
[edit] Comments on the Arms Control,Terrorism, Disease & Global Warming Sections of the Article
Dear contributors,
This is a good start, but the fundamental flaw in all of these sections is that there is not enough information on how these sections relate to the Human Security agenda. Remember, this is an article on Human Security. People reading it want to understand more about what Human Security means and how it is practiced. Those who want to read about terrorism, arms control, global warming, HIV/AIDS, etc can go directly to those Wikipedia articles to do so. For example, backgound information about specific threats (eg Global Warming or disease) should be included in the respective threat articles themselves (assuming this information is not already a part of these articles). What readers of the Human Security article want to know is how human security purports to deal with these threats and why human security provides a better alternative to what is already being done. (if you don't think it does, then perhaps the relelvant section could be moved to the "criticisms" part of the article.)
Also, be careful of using phrases such as "human security proponents argue that...." unless you have specific reference citations about whom you are talking. A safer way to phrase such sentences might be to say something like ... "In contrast to a more traditional security mindset, the human security school of thought highlights ..." Overall this article needs to be much more attentive to the diversity of opinions which characterize the human security school and how it should be practiced. Keep up the good editing!
--LMCinHK 11:31, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Article Size
As you may have noticed, this article has already exceeded the recommended Wikipedia article size. Its not something we should worry about right now since we are still working out the content of this article and how best to organize this content, but it is important as a reminder to keep your contributions brief and to the point ... The quality not the quantity of your contribution is what is important here. --LMCinHK 14:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] More Comments on the practice sections of the article
Now that editors have made their initial contributions to the "human security" practice section of the article, it is time to get down to some serious editing.... as mentioned, much stronger links need to be made demonstrating what these sections have to do with human security. It is not enough to just mention that these issues demonstrate human security principles in practice, you need to show how. All of you have made a good start, but you need to focus on explaining to the readers why these case studies represent good examples of human security in practice. Also, as mentioned, much of this information in this section could be moved to other articles. Looking forward to reading more and keep up the good editing. --LMCinHK 00:44, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Arms Control
Hey, if anyone has any input on the Arms Control section it would be appreciated. I think it is a bit wordy, but not sure what can be cut down on. Also, check out the smart mine page, i started it with some brief information but could do with more input. ta (devonwhittle 04:47, 4 May 2006 (UTC))
Great work on the arms control Thewaya - i think its quite reasonable on the word count and covers the important points, i only made some minor edits, hope they're ok by you.
Cheers Charlene (Pangaea42 10:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC))
[edit] Terrorism
I made some major edits to the terrorism section, by moving chunks of this section to the terrorism article itself. --LMCinHK 15:26, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Development
Hi there Chun - good work on your article - i only made some minor changes to some sentences - hope you find them ok Cheers Charlene (Pangaea42 10:36, 8 May 2006 (UTC))
[edit] Humanitarian Intervention
I moved my description of the R2P report to the first paragraph of the “Responsibility to protect” article and focused more importance of R2P on HS - on the advice of LMCinHK – thanks. I hope the first paragraph is a bit more readable for you guys now too; dont i just love my long sentences
Cheers Charlene (Pangaea42 12:12, 8 May 2006 (UTC))
[edit] Infectious disease
I deleted sections on H5N1, HIV/AIDS, and implementation difficulties because I didn't find these sections directly relevant to the topic of human security. That said, if others disagree they can certainly reinstate these sections with perhaps further explanations of their relavance to the human security approach. Best, --LMCinHK 23:59, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Invites for Further edits
While U21 Human Security students have done a fantastic job of getting this article started (Well done, all!), alas the course has come to an end and much more work needs to be done to strengthen this article. Looking forward to the many continued editorial contributions from fellow Wikipedians -- LMCinHK 15:09, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
