Talk:Kafala system

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:

1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:32, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Removed tone tag.

I've removed the tone tag as the article has been suitably improved since the tag was placed in may 2013 (also there was no discussion justifying it - I presume it was placed due to the state of the Qatar section at the time). Finally does this article not deserve a higher rating than 'low importance' in the Wikiproject human rights'?1812ahill (talk) 13:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Removing old merge tag with vaguely related article

The merge tag merge|Islamic adoptional jurisprudence|date=February 2017 is old and I don't see any justification apart from the fact that the word الكفالة (kafala) is the same as that in نظام الكفالة niẓām al-kafāla. Migrant workers and adoption of children are two quite different topics. There's a claim of an islamic jurisprudence link between the two topics - see Talk:Islamic_adoptional_jurisprudence#Merge, but that doesn't justify a merge. It does justify adding some references to justify the historical link between the two topics... Boud (talk) 21:16, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

The link is in fact interesting: it suggests that the adult migrant workers are under Islamic law considered to be minors. Boud (talk) 21:17, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

rm cn tag

The July 2015 tag for adding more citations looks like it was not valid back in July 2015, and it is not valid now! Please add specific Template:citation needed tags on sentences or facts that need citations. Or even better, find some WP:RS to support the claims or to support corrected claims of facts. Boud (talk) 21:26, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

App shows South African Apartheid sign

When viewing the article on the Android app, it shows a sign from Apartheid South Africa. Anyone have any idea why this is and how we can fix it? Antigravity711 (talk) 20:03, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Numbers Wrong

According to these sources the numbers are 30m NOT 2.5m in GCC nations, with wage theft rates and other forms of exploitation at near 40%. Also, why the strange reference to Israel. I'm Chomskian on Israel, but it is irrelevant and indicative of a non-scholarly pathological comparative interest to even mention Israel. Why not then mention all exploitive labor systems? People can read about exploited labor in a general article and come here to read about the Kafala System.

Council on Foreign Relations. (2022). What Is the Kafala System? • The Generation. (2024). The Complex Realities of Migrant Labor Exploitation in the GCC. • Walk Free. (2023). ARAB STATES - Regional Report. 2601:645:8087:11A0:1903:CEE7:A897:24DE (talk) 11:51, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

Move the information on Israel to a separate article? =

I am unsure of the purpose of mentioning Israeli segregation efforts in such detail on a page dedicated to a system that is not practiced there. Surely this would be better as its own page, or merged into another page discussing prejudice in Israel? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.173.152.199 (talk) 16:48, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

This is not quite the same as "segregation". The sources we currently have state that the "binding" system, equivalent to the kafala system, did formally exist in Israel until 2006; and we have what appears to be research stating that the system still de facto existed in Israel in 2014. We have two short paragraphs, which seems reasonable. If there is an appropriate Wikipedia article that covers this in-depth, then that can be added with {{main}} or {{see also}}, depending on how directly or indirectly it's related. Boud (talk) 16:47, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

This seems outdated?

20 paragraphs on Qatar, all placed in the section of current states that didn’t abolish the kefala system. But Qatar has abolished it years ago. Meanwhile Saudi Arabia is placed in countries that abolished it even though Qatar had done so much before. Catofminerva (talk) 22:22, 7 November 2025 (UTC)

@Catofminerva: The categorisation into ended/diluted/still practice was introduced in this edit on 09:17, 20 October 2025 by an IP editor, i.e. barely a month ago, without prior discussion (though also no objections until now). Given the difficulty in finding WP:RS that confirm the real, rather than just formal legal, status of ended, I think that the categorisation into status sections risks wasting a lot of editing energy, because the actual status of domestic workers per country, their formal legal status, and the quality and publication of human rights organisations' and academic researchers' analyses are going to vary with time. We don't want to spend a lot of time debating which section to put a country into. Better that we improve the quality of the text and sourcing. I've reverted the categorisation.

What would be useful is to add a table pointing to laws and legal changes per country. While law is not the same as actual events, especially in countries with no separation of powers, that would still be significant knowledge. Boud (talk) 16:26, 30 November 2025 (UTC)

Seems like a good call, and a good suggestion.

Thanks and good tidings, غوّاص العلم (talk) 07:48, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: States and their Secrets

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation–supported course assignment, between 26 August 2025 and 19 December 2025. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Watertheroot (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:23, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Massive removal of Qatar material

This edit removed a massive amount of well-sourced material on the Kafala system in Qatar. The key reasons stated in the edit summary were that the section was impossibly and unreasonably long, had many statements and sources relevant to around 10 years ago and more, redundancies.

Wikipedia is not a news bulletin or report about the current state of the world. It is an encyclopedia. Information relevant to around 10 years ago and more is completely on-topic.

The edit removed a massive amount of material that looked on-topic for the Kafala system in Qatar. If there is too much information for this article, then we should consider a WP:SPLIT to Kafala system in Qatar: see WP:NOTPAPER: Splitting long articles signals a natural growth of a topic ...

I initially tried copyediting the new text, but too many corrections were needed, so instead I restored the deleted material.

I suggest small edits to improve the Qatar section piece by piece. Some improvement is needed, but not massive removal. Boud (talk) 06:16, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Boud. I appreciate the effort and thought you put into this, and your good intentions, but I have some qualms.

It seems to me that even by your own metrics, reverting to the previous state is a downgrade. The section is now back to extensively using an unqualified present tense on statements based on sources from over a decade ago, whereas my version used a qualified past tense with sources from this year.

I would like to reflect to you that your points about "news bulletin", "current state", "it is an encyclopedia" and so on come off as patronizing and unnecessary, especially considering that my version has a history section with multiple subheadings, going back further into the past than the version that you restored goes.

Additionally, the version you restored, beyond the issue with out of date present tenses, goes far, far beyond an encyclopedia talking about the past. It is a crusty mess of historical tidbits, apparently added over years by various editors with little consideration for the relevance of each tidbit and for the overall result, as is very common in Wikipedia, to the detriment of encyclopedic value, especially considering that this is just a "per country" subsection. I replaced this with a summary of what I considered to be the most pertinent aspects of the arc of the history of this subject, going back to earlier history than the previous version, and up to very recent history.

As I clearly said in my edit summary: "If anyone thinks this new version is missing anything important, please feel free to add it in." I am requesting that you restore my shortened and more comprehensive (if less detailed) version. If there are specific details that I removed and you think are important to keep, or even a whole category of details, and you don't want to incorporate them into the new version yourself, you may even request that I do so myself, since this is an issue I care about a lot, and I would be happy to do so, possibly pending some discussion. You may also look here for the similar process I alluded to in my edit summary, that took place over on Human rights in Qatar#Labour with the support of a seasoned WikiProject Qatar editor.

If you think that the encyclopedia really needs ALL of these details (and presumably more, since these are a somewhat random selection out of a much larger category of similar ones), you may suggest an article, existing or not, where you think that that would be appropriate, and I would be happy to collaborate on that.

Thanks and good tidings, غوّاص العلم (Ghawwas) (talk) 07:42, 18 August 2026 (UTC)