Wikipedia Edit, 28 November 2010

Dear Jac,
Will you please explain why my Human Rights entry on the National Cheng Kung University page was removed for being "poorly sourced"? I don't understand. It's been on for weeks now. It's completely sourced, in both Chinese and English, with official court and Ministry of Education documents. Your removal came on the same day when an editor pushed my human rights entry further down the page with this comment:

(cur | prev) 00:37, 28 November 2010 128.232.134.168 (talk) (8,868 bytes) (Moved "Human rights record" section further down the page becuase it seems less important than much of the other content, and of less interest to the general reader.) (undo)

I commented on his Talk Page:

User talk:128.232.134.168
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Re: your comment: (Moved "Human rights record" section further down the page becuase it seems less important than much of the other content, and of less interest to the general reader.)

I don't understand your point of view: what is more important than human rights, especially for a university, which can only stand on moral integrity and human rights. Without human rights on what basis can a university stand: Without the insurance of human rights, how can a university insure the integrity of grading, of the curriculum, of academic promotion? That's why tenure was established at many universities in the first place. Do you really think human rights is of lesser importance than how many colleges there are at a university? Human rights may not be of primary importance in Mainland China, but it should certainly be of primary importance at a university in Taiwan, which calls itself a democracy and which has only recently formally endorsed international human rights charters. --Cincinattus (talk) 03:01, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Your comment was:

(cur | prev) 00:58, 28 November 2010 Jac16888 (talk | contribs) (7,237 bytes) (→Human Rights Record: rm poorly sourced allegations) (undo)

But how can these be "poorly sourced allegations"? They're not even "allegations" in the stric legal sense of that word. A person "allegedly" committed a crime until he's convicted; then it's legally justified to say that person committed that crime. An allegation is an accusation that has not been verified. But both court and Ministry of Education documents have fully verified my statement, which therefore cannot be called mere "allegations."

If these were indeed "allegations" they would have been removed immediately as soon as I posted them, but they were not, once I "sourced" the claims with legal documents (and if court and Ministry of Education rulings and letters are not "legal" then I don't understand what currency the word "legal" has on Wikipedia. Why was my entry left on for seeks after I "sourced" it then removed on the same day that user 128.232.134.168 thought legal rights "less important" and of "less interest"? First, human rights are of primary importance to a university, or at least should be. If 128.232.134.168 thinks otherwise, he or she has a right to that opinion; but I doubt it would be shared by most academics. And I'm not sure if a university should establish itself on what's interesting or uninteresting. I think a university should establish itself on what's just or unjust. The recent incident regarding Ms. Yang Shun-chun shows how sensitive the issue of injustice can be in Taiwan, or does the issue of justice just pertain to Taiwanese and not to foreigners?

But evidently the agenda of 128.232.134.168 is different from mine, so I'll address the main issue here to you. Please Jac, explain to me what you mean by "unsourced" and why this claim was made only now and not before when the sourcing has not changed since it was first entered no later than November 7, 2010. Thanks for your consideration, Jac.
--~~~~