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
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
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
I'm going to work to try and develop this at some point as I feel it's fairly important, particularly due to recent movements such as Occupy. Thoughts? Mikejamesshaw (talk) 21:13, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The whole article is of questionable value, uses inane jargon, and altogether is an attempt to reimagine violence-prone radical protesters as benign. Specifically, though, nowhere does this stream of inanity spell out the fundamental nature of “occupation” as depriving the owners of property their rights. When these occupiers squat somewhere, they are violating the fundamental rights of people to enjoy public spaces, if government owned property, or their own space if privately owned. That should be addressed forthrightly in the lead.
