Talk:Affirmative action

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Affirmative action article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 365 days

This page is not a forum for general discussion about Affirmative action. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Affirmative action at the Reference desk.

This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.

Mismatching was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 17 January 2011 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Affirmative action. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Social Work Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Social Work, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Social Work on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Social WorkWikipedia:WikiProject Social WorkTemplate:WikiProject Social WorkSocial work articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Business High‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

India: Politics High‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Indian politics workgroup (assessed as High-importance).

Discrimination High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DiscriminationWikipedia:WikiProject DiscriminationTemplate:WikiProject DiscriminationDiscrimination articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Indian caste system Top‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indian caste system, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Caste system in India, DBA experiences, narratives and movements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indian caste systemWikipedia:WikiProject Indian caste systemTemplate:WikiProject Indian caste systemIndian caste system articles

Top

This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale.

WikiProject Indian caste system to do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Citing sources : Poona Pact needs secondary sources
Collaborate : Media and caste to look like Media and gender
Expand : Annihilation of Caste

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology Mid‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education assignment: Introduction to Policy Analysis

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2022 and 30 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yajzel V (article contribs).

Wiki Education assignment: Gender, Race and Computing

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 September 2023 and 15 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): RyanDing26 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by !777francis777! (talk) 18:14, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Affirmative action in Sri Lanka

Why is this section's neutrality being disputed? Jarble (talk) 19:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested edit to lead paragraph regarding military academies and the Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard case

The lead paragraph currently says the Students for Fair Admissions ruling "does not explicitly apply to U.S. military academies..." I think it would be more precise to say: "the Court explicitly exempted the U.S. military academies and their use of race-based affirmative action from its ruling," which is more like how the WP article on the Students for Fair Admissions case puts it. Or: "the ruling explicitly left the door open for service academies to continue to use race-conscious admissions programs," which is how the Scotusblog source cited in that article puts it.

The way it's written now makes it seem like the court just didn't say explicitly that the ruling does apply to the military academies, but actually the Court explicitly suggested that ruling may not apply to the military academies. The distinction seems important, but as a relatively new editor on WP, and recognizing this is a controversial topic, I hesitate to change it myself. Jameson Nightowl (talk) 05:34, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think 'explicitly' is not the right term in this case. It implies that the matter of military academies was directly addressed in the decision. In the Washington Post article on the decision, it says that, "in a footnote, [Chief Justice Roberts] acknowledged that (sic) federal government's interest in diversity recruitment at the nation's military academies. He held out the possibility that an argument could be considered in a future case, 'in light of the potentially distinct interests that military academies may present.'" There have been subsequent unsuccessful challenges by the S.F.A. to the military academies' continued use of race-based admissions policies. My suggestion: The ruling acknowledges the "potentially distinct interests that military academies may present" and suggests that an argument on the matter could be considered in a future case. Pillarfog (talk) 20:20, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Positive Discrimination

The British term for 'affirmative action' is 'positive discrimination', not 'positive action'. There's a difference between these terms! Positive action is about helping marginalised groups, but one will not lower standards for them. An example of helping them would be including them in advertisements, hiring them if they meet the conditions, etc. מושא עקיף (talk) 02:10, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just added again, I think whoever edited it thought they were synonyms. ComradeHektor (talk) 05:15, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: ENGL 1301

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 9 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Esycgndur64sdikyv (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Esycgndur64sdikyv (talk) 17:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Combining "Support"/"Criticism" sections?

Normally, we try to avoid "Criticism" sections because they can present problems in achieving WP:NPOV. Perhaps, rather than having separate pro and ante sections, we should have one Responses or Analysis section, so that the main arguments can be raised in one place and either countered or supported in the same section. In my view, this will flow more organically, avoid duplication of content, and make it easier to achieve a neutral POV throughout.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this, before I make any bold edits? Lewisguile (talk) 10:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I support this change. I think readers are smart enough to distinguish support from criticism anyway. StephenMacky1 (talk) 11:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant. And re-reading both sections, they're not that long and they already include a mix of supporting and critical viewpoints. I think I know how I can do this so it flows a bit better, so I'll see if anyone objects first and then take a stab at this later on today or tomorrow. Lewisguile (talk) 11:15, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a good change. I think similar combining support and criticism like that on other WP pages would help improve WP:NPOV generally. Jameson Nightowl (talk) 02:45, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]