Template talk:Abuse
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
Articles related to Abuse |
| By means |
|
Abstract concepts Physical abuse Psychological abuse Sexual abuse |
| By victim |
|
Child abuse / Domestic violence |
| By offender |
| Related |
Contents |
[edit] Coercion
This currently looks like a subcat of Psychological abuse. This does not fit the definition of coercion, which is primarily to do with using abuse (or threatened abuse) to achieve specific aims. Also, I think a variation of the marketing template (with different colours) would look better. Rd232 13:18, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Execution
Execution, while its power can be abused, is not by definition an abuse of power, and therefore does not belong on this template. Perhaps a sub-article or addition to the current article can make it a possible link, but as it stands now the template looks very POV on that page.Daemon8666 21:20, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Voting-for-deletion closed
 |
This template survived a request for deletion. The result of the discussion was keep. |
[edit] Re-structured
Entries were re-structured by "categories" (categorized by means of abuse, by victims of abuse, and by offenders of abuse).
[edit] Corporal Punishment
I've taken this template off the corporal punishment page because it implies that corporal punishment is abuse and there are people who would argue that it often isn't. I don't think having the template there (in its current form at least) is compatible with npov. --Cherry blossom tree 12:42, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
- I know that mild forms of corporal punishment, such as spanking, are practiced by many parents still in many otherwise highly developed nations as normal part of child rearing, while the same people would be very upset if the same measure would be aplied to themselves as a punishment (imagine police officer would try to - very very mildly - hit you, for example, as a punishment for your misbehavior in traffic?!), which I consider an example of hypocrisy. If the above imagined incident is considered abuse, why the same measure is not considered abuse when applied to a child? But, I know, the things are in the world as they are :( So, I think that for the sake of consistency only, however, you, if you really think that this is not abuse, should remove the corporal punishment from the Template:Abuse, too, don't you think so? SloContributorSince2005 13:29, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
-
- I'm happy for corporal punishment to stay in the template because I think that corporal punishment is relevent to abuse. My problem was that having that template on top of the corporal punishment page implied that it was all abuse which seems to be endorsing one side of the argument. I'm happy with it as it is now from a npov perspective, though i'd admit that it looks a bit less elegant. I don't have any particular opinion on whether corporal punishment of children is good or bad having never raised any. I'd like to think I wouldn't use it, but I'll have to get back to you in thirty years or so. --Cherry blossom tree 15:50, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
-
- I've changed it a bit while doing some other tidying. I'm not sure if it really works, but it's slimmer at least. --Cherry blossom tree 15:56, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- I took a stab at resolving this as I do concur that both the template's inclusion in CP and CP's place within the template are potentially misleading. Please feel free to revert --Acq3 06:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] "Consensual sex lacking informed consent" -> "Informed consent"
While you have tried to remove the piping "Consensual sex lacking informed consent", you did not notice that the "Informed consent" itself is now listed as abuse :-) - so you should at least keep "The lack of" in front of it, you see? SloContributorSince2005 13:29, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Too many included?
IMV there are many articles listed where
- it is relatively POV to state the phenomenon is 'abuse' (e.g. manipulation)
- the articles linked to are so different as to be almsot useless.
I have nothing against this template existing to link together clear forms of abuse. I am making edits on this basis, please let me know if you have objections. The Land 14:44, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Suggested changes
- use a lighter color for the top header block containing the text "Topics related to ..."
- change "by offender" to "by context" or "by milieu"
- move "Domestic abuse" to the revised "by context" or "by milieu"; an appropriate "by victim" entry instead might be "Spousal abuse"
Thanks for considering these suggestions. Courtland 01:53, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Wikipedia is screwed up
There's actually a template devoted to 'Abuse' and lots of discussion about it, but no 'Anatomy' template for example? Of course, if there was one for Anatomy I'm pretty sure Penis and Testicle (a lot of bizarre crap in that article) would be prominenty featured right at the top. 172.160.151.73 17:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
