Talk:Mauritius

Chagos Archipelago section
The section on the Chagos Archipelago is far too long for this article. Everything other than the first paragraph and maybe a second paragraph summarizing the all other Chagos Archipelago dispute content should be moved to their own respective articles and removed from this article. This article is on the country of Mauritius after all, not the Chagos Archipelago dispute which only forms a a part of that country's biography.--Discott (talk) 09:59, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are right, i will try to clean it up. Regards --Kingroyos (talk) 15:15, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Thank you ! That's exactly what I have been saying to for months !

Manish2542 (talk) 19:55, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Dear, needful was already done in April 2019, we are already in August now. You had been removing content in the intro and not in the Chagos Archipelago section. Kingroyos (talk) 05:06, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

"The UK has restricted access to" has an ambiguous meaning and should be changed. It should I think say "The UK has imposed a restricted access to". Right now, it might mean that the UK cannot access it, itself. --User:theredsprite — Preceding undated comment added 22:00, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 February 2022
Typo in the introduction: change "country African country" to "African country". WikiFouf (talk) 06:44, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ Cannolis (talk) 06:50, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:12, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Mauritius Product Exports (2019).svg

1914–1919: World War I prosperity
The one and only source cited in the section "1914–1919: World War I prosperity" contains no mention of WW1, nor of the period 1914-18. 80.3.183.104 (talk) 05:04, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

The mention of homosexuality in the legal system section
To elaborate on what I'd written in my edit summary, I removed the sentence There are no legal restrictions against homosexuality in Mauritius. because, in a general article on Mauritius, in a general section about its legal system, listing that one particular thing is not illegal, out of all the things that are not illegal in that country, or that are legal there, gives that one thing WP:UNDUE emphasis. The entire legal system doesn't exactly revolve around that one non-prohibition, yet the positioning of that sentence in the place in an otherwise general section gives the impression that that is the height of everything that has ever happened in the Mauritian legal system. Its insertion there as though it were of supreme significance in the overall context of the Mauritian legal system is an WP:NPOV violation.

Varoon2542's alternative explanation for my edit, as though the above weren't a valid argument was that it was out of "low-key homophobia". As I've already noted in my edit summary response, I'm gay and have advocated for gay rights for 45 years. This isn't the first time somebody has resorted to attributing hatred of some sort to me as a reason for an edit I made. I (Jewish as well as gay) have been accused here of both homophobia and anti-Semitism for making legitimate edits. Let this be a lesson: hate is sometimes but usually not the reason that people do things you disagree with, so you'd better know what you're talking about before making accusations.

It's worth noting that the language was added in this edit. The full text had been Mauritius is often described as Africa's most developed country. There are no legal restrictions against homosexuality in Mauritius. This was clearly POV, with the second sentence intended to support the first in implying that a lack of legal restrictions on homosexuality is a centerpiece of a developed country. I mean, I think it isbut that's my POV, it doesn't belong in an article. Later, someone removed the first sentence, so that sentence about homosexuality was left dangling without even the original context it had been brought in to support.

The language has now been added and removed twice, so beware of edit warring. Please discuss before restoring it. Largoplazo (talk) 11:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)