Talk:South Carolina Human Affairs Commission

Neutrality

• Opinions add color and to an article. I sure you are aware of WP:NPOV and WP:BALANCE. Quotes from politicians aggrandizing organizations they participate in seems like content that is likely to not meet these policies especially when the sources are from an obituary.

In the wake of Governor West's death, Clyburn remarked that the creation of the Commission was "breaking ground" and that "No Southern state was doing what John West was doing. None."

Sources

• I think WP:ABOUTSELF sources are fine for the dates that laws occurred but not for building more abstract claims like Racial unrest continued or assesments of other programs After a Governor's Advisory Committee on Human Relations proved insufficient
• South Carolina's Lactation Support Act served as the model for federal legislation enacted in 2020 You definitely cannot used a politician involved in promoting the law as the source for a claim like this

I don't really agree with your interpretation of this but I can give some leeway here  Done

• Occasionally, if a settlement between the complainant and respondent cannot be reached, the Commission may file a lawsuit against a respondent to enforce its determination that unlawful discrimination has occurred Aboutself is not ok for this claim.

WP:COAT

• In 1989, the General Assembly passed, and Governor Carroll A. Campbell signed into law, the South Carolina Fair Housing Law (FHL).[13] The FHL expanded the Commission's mission scope to include certain housing discrimination claims. This paragraph can be a single sentence as the procedure for enacting laws in the state is not the point of this article. i.e. The South Carolina Fair Housing Law, enacted in 1989, expanded the Commission's mission scope to include certain housing discrimination claims.
• A lot of detail about the Pregnancy Accommodation Act takes this article from an entry about the org to more of a history of laws

Spot Checks

• These statutes, in turn, allow the Commission to promulgate administrative rules. The South Carolina Administrative Procedures Act also applies to the Commission's proceedings.  Not done source does not verify these claims
• The Commission receives its authority from enabling acts passed by the General Assembly. These are the South Carolina Human Affairs Law, the South Carolina Fair Housing Law, the Equal Enjoyment and Privileges to Public Accommodations Act, the Pregnancy Accommodation Act, and the Lactation Support Act. Not done For example this source does not contain "Pregnancy".

Coverage

A check on WP:TWL newspaper archive shows the Aiken Standard has a number of reports on topics not covered here from 2005-2013. At a glance, some information from these articles seem due for inclusion to me.

Pause

This is quite the number of issues. The sourcing and failed spot check concerns make it unlikely this is can be GA at this time. However, I will give you some time to address and respond to the feedback. I want to remind you of WP:BACKWARDS. Also

Discussion

Hi there, thank you for undertaking a review. While I disagree with much of your assessment, I'll do my best to make edits I believe have merit.

On neutrality, can you identify specific areas you feel are non-neutral? If you are discussing the quotes from Clyburn, those are 1) not from an obitruary and 2) properly attributed and not in wikivoice.

On sources, I've removed the language discussing the Governor's advisory committee. However, I did not "use a politician involved in promoting the law as the source for a claim like this." The cited article, written by journalist Bob Montgomery, says, "The S.C. Lactation Support Act was used by federal lawmakers to create the Providing Urgent Maternal Protections (PUMP) for Nursing Act requiring employers to provide a break time and private space for breastfeeding employees to nurse while at work." Wikipedians should and can definitely use reliable sources to support claims like this.

On WP:COAT allegations, I've made the suggested edit concerning the FHL. Likewise, I've made the pregnancy/lactation legislation section slimmer. However, discussing the protections/mandates of those laws directly impact the scope and authority of SCHAC, making them relevant to the article. Similar passages exist discussing the legislative impact of other laws empowering SCHAC.

On the "spot checks", the cited source, SCHAC's website, clearly states its purpose is to "administer and enforce" the cited laws. I've added a second source detailing the Commission's enforcement against pregnancy discrimination. Additionally, I've added pinpoint citations to the specific statutory language authorizing SCHAC to promulgate rules for the enforcement and administration of the various Acts.

On coverage, I, too, have conducted a thorough review of mentions of SCHAC found in the Newspaper Archive (among many other sources). I've added those I consider substantive and necessary for inclusion. As I'm sure you're aware, not every mention of a subject in a reliable source is suited for inclusion in an article. Trival, non-primary, or routine coverage isn't notable. If you feel there are articles suited for inclusion that are not currently mentioned or discussed, please identify them. The fact that mentions exist from 2005-2013 is not sufficient reason, on its own, to conclude a flaw is present.

Again, while I disagree with your claim that there is sourcing issues, hopefully these edits will placate your concerns.

Happy editing, Bravelake (talk) 23:05, 21 June 2026 (UTC)

Fail

Although this article is fixable, in its present form it does not rely on secondary and independent sources. I suggest starting from scratch with the compelling sources that are simultaneously reliable, secondary, independent, and directly covering the article subject. Czarking0 (talk) 00:12, 22 June 2026 (UTC)