Talk:Afghan Constitution Commission

Comments
This article was getting a bit lengthy and overdone. Also, it was turning into a long chronology. I spent a good hour removing redundancies, fixing tenses, re-organizing and clarifying. I removed news items that were pasted into the article. I also removed the text of the proposed constitution and placed it in its own article: Proposed Afghan Constitution.

This article still needs to be streamlined. I welcome anyone to help. I'll give it another shot after a few days rest.

My compliments go out to User:CBorges for all the hard work put into this article. Kingturtle 07:20, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)

When I first started experimenting with Wikipedia I went to the requested articles list and looked at the alphabetical list. Afghan articles were at the top, not surprisingly.

I'm greatly relieved that someone has taken up the task of improving this article. Although I hope things work out for Afghanistan and its people, this is not an area of expertise for me.

I certainly accept all of User:Kingturtle's comments. The article was getting overly long and not mentioning opposition to the draft was a serious omission on my part.

I would just add that it appears someone has undone his attempt to set up an article called Proposed Afghan Constitution. It now just redirects to the Afghan Constitution Commission entry, and the draft constitution has thus disappeared, which I think is a pity.

There also seems to be a problem with the numbering in the table of contents.

I'll check again in a few days once the imminent loya jirga is over. If User:Kingturtle or anyone else has added coverage by then, great. I'm happy to pass on the torch.

Otherwise I'll work on the formatting issue and do an update. CBorges 04:47, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

A discussion on Votes for deletion took place regarding Proposed Afghan Constitution. It reads as follows:
 * Afghan Constitution Commission was getting huge and unruly. While parsing it down, I cut the Proposed Afghan Constitution out and gave it its own article. However, I am not sure if Wikipedia is a facility for full-texts of Constitutions. It may have to be deleted. What are your thoughts? Kingturtle 07:25, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC) P.S. By the way, when counting up the votes, DO NOT count me as a vote either way. I am not sure which way to go on this question.
 * I think it's better to link to the text on an external (and authoritative) site. Onebyone 11:10, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Agree. Anjouli 12:56, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Redirected to Afghan Constitution Commission - will move to redirects for deletion. Martin 19:35, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Maybe in the end of this process, this could turn into a redirect, but I think the community needs first to further discuss the article's potential or lack of potential. So, for now, I have removed the redirect. Kingturtle 21:01, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Ok, that's fine. Wikipedia is not a collection of source texts, which is what normally applies here. Still, since we won't be deleting this article, it's probably not best placed here. Martin 00:43, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Actually, I suppose what should appear at Proposed Afghan Constitution is a history and summary. Kingturtle 21:15, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep, use redirects to fix. Daniel Quinlan 17:08, Dec 3, 2003 (UTC)

It was then decided to turn that page into a redirect. But if you feel otherwise, we can discuss it here. Kingturtle 04:58, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Missing links
The link to http://www.unhcr.org.uk/afghanistan/documents/38eng_000.pdf is broken, but the directory still has content in http://www.unhcr.org.uk/afghanistan/documents/ but I could not decide which was appropriate.