Talk:Work permit

Work permit for fiancee

is fincee visa holder can apply a work permit once she arrive in the u.s? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.213.126.139 (talk • contribs)

• I'm not entirely sure, but I believe they can. Rackabello 21:05, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Removed information on UK work permits

I appreciate the addition of the information on the UK, but there's a page already covering this elsewhere in Wikipedia, and requirements can vary from one country to another. VivaBelgica2 09:53, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I saw that an earlier change I made was reverted. I think the link should be deleted as it's just an advertisement for the book; there is no usable information at the website. 67.168.65.207 22:46, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Your information was clearly not relevant, and the information which you cite was not to be found on the US embassy website. Futhermore, the US information is only relevant to US citizens. The website in question served as the basis for the page for quite some time and is the source of the information, commercial or not. (VivaBelgicaBE 16:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC))

Removed information and links on EU and country policies

Due to continued vandalism from CliffC and 67.168.65.207, information relating to other websites has been removed entirely. Should the two posters involved desire to actually contribute something to this page, instead of substituting links which have no information whatsoever about the topic on this page, then they are free to do so. (VivaBelgicaBE 01:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC))

After further discussion, the proper footnote will be put back in to show the original source of the information. (VivaBelgicaBE 02:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC))

VivaBelgicaBE, the changes you made are shown here. As pointed out when they were reverted, you substituted your commercial link for several links to United Nations and US Embassy sources. Please take a deep breath, read the policy links I and other editors have posted on your talk page, and stop spamming your site. Wikipedia is not a billboard. --CliffC 02:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not my site. The footnotes which you and the other person put in have no relation whatsoever to the information posted on this page. In fact another link, was completely irrelevant. This is an issue of correct attribution and copyright, nothing else, and no one seems to be able to grasp that point. (VivaBelgicaBE 02:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC))

I'm looking at a report on Migration from the World Bank, at

http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTECA/Resources/257896-1167856389505/Migration_Chapter1.pdf

and they're measuring the number of migrants by country. Germany came in third, which doesn't corroborate that link's assertion that Germany has relatively strict immigration laws. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.168.65.207 (talk) 04:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Added information on EU "Blue Card", country permit requirements

Hi, I'd just like to say that the US Embassy's information on the process of getting a work permit in Italy and Germany is clearly relevant to the page, as well as supporting the assertion that it's easier to get a work permit in Italy than in Germany. 67.168.65.207 02:08, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

They are irrelevant as they do not contain the information which 67.168.65.207 contends that they do. Substituting an original source, as one does not agree with the nature of it, for an irrelevant one which contains no info, is not what one would think as leading to good practice. (VivaBelgicaBE 18:24, 11 November 2007 (UTC))

I'm glad the info is no longer here, but why on earth would a US embassy be posting information on work permits in another country? Boggles my mind that anyone would even think that. An American embassy posting its own requirements, OK. Another country's? Nah.(PigEyeJackson (talk) 18:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC))

Great question. Part of the reason the embassy is there is to provide information to Americans about different issues they may have while abroad, including work visas etc. For example, at the American Embassy to Italy

http://italy.usembassy.gov/acs/general-visiting.asp

There's a section called "Work Permits," with the following information:

American citizens who have a job offer in Italy, or wish to work in Italy, either temporarily or permanently, must be provided with a work permit obtained by the prospective employer, and must obtain a work visa from the Italian Consular authorities BEFORE coming to Italy. A written job offer or an employment contract is not regarded as a valid document for working in Italy: the prospective employer is required to apply for preliminary clearance from the provincial employment office (Ufficio Provinciale del Lavoro e della Massima Occupazione) in the proposed city of employment by submitting evidence that persons qualified for the position offered to a non-resident foreigner are not available in the local labor market. If clearance is granted, the prospective employer is further required to obtain a work permit with the approval of the regional and central authorities. The permit is then sent to the worker so that he or she may apply for the entry visa. There are Italian consular offices in most major cities in the U.S. The procedure for professional and self-employment is basically the same as that described above. A permit to reside in Italy for the purpose of employment is obtained after arrival in the country from the central police office (Questura) having jurisdiction. To apply for permit, you must submit a valid Italian visa and work permit.

71.231.143.160 (talk) 19:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Obviously you've never lived abroad. If you think that it's the responsibility of the US consulate in a given country to get its citizens relevant legal information about local work laws, then you're highly naive. I've lived and worked in Italy, and I should know. Heck, even the lawyers don't know what's going on half of the time. The embassy is there for you if you're in difficulties like you lose your passport or something else. Beyond that it's AMFYOYO. (PigEyeJackson (talk) 07:44, 15 March 2008 (UTC))

Refactored page

I have refactored this page to make it easier to follow:

• put comments in chronological order
• added section titles
• added standard indentation.

If you don't like the title I gave a section you started, feel free to change it. --CliffC 04:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Copyright Violations

I will write to the copyright holder about 67.168.65.207's continued problem with copyright violations and ongoing spamming on unrelated links to the original content. (VivaBelgicaBE 11:23, 11 November 2007 (UTC))

It's not spam to post links to governments' websites regarding their work permit system and process. What are the copyright issues? 67.168.65.207 16:36, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia takes copyright law very seriously. All editors should be familiar with WP:COPY, and particularly in this case the section WP:COPY#If you find a copyright infringement. --CliffC 17:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

This page violates Wikipedia’s stated copyright rules. I have tried to blank the text, but others have threatened to ban me for having done so.

The problem with the page stems from a poster, identified by IP number 67.168.65.207. He seems to have a grudge against the source of the original information, and has repeatedly substituted the correct footnote attribution with unrelated sites which do not contain information remotely related to the text found on the work permits page. (You can see from the history that the text on the work permit page that the copyright holder placed it there, and that it mirrors text found at http://www.diyexpat.com/visa%20guide/workpermits.html.)

67.168.65.207 has tried to state that there is no copyright or to “paraphrase” part of the text, without substantially adding anything. In fact, his additions are completely false and unattributed.

67.168.65.207 has said that he is against commercial links, however, he removed the link on the following page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_Germany, (substituting a footnote of unrelated material for the same footnote as at the work permit page) but left two commercially-related links on the page. This indicates not only bias but harassment.

Suggest that both 67.168.65.207’s addition to the work permits and immigration to Germany pages be removed, and that he be banned from making further changes. (VivaBelgicaBE 22:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC))

Hi, I noticed we still have this text:

European countries may also have political or economic targets in controlling the number of work permits given out. For example, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Germany, France and Belgium have relatively strict criteria. Italy and Spain, on the other hand, may show more flexibility in certain areas deemed important for the local economy. These work permits often go by different names, although they may carry work permission, as a work permit does

which is from the web page that VivaBelgicaBE links to. I suspect this is the problem s/he's talking about.

I'm comfortable deleting it or rephrasing it. I am concerned that the link doesn't support how Italy and Spain are more flexible than the other countries named in terms of work permits. Belgium's been a center of international business for a long time and my understanding is that it's much easier to get a work permit there than in Italy or Spain. Likewise, both the UK and the Netherlands have traditionally experienced high levels of skilled immigration. Italy has a more decentralized implementation of their immigration policy, leaving many decisions up to the different regions, but overall I'd say having a different process for each region makes it more difficult, not less.

Germany, however, is an excellent example of a country with difficult immigration laws, and there are other resources that more articulately present that arguement. For example from, Der Spiegel:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,502786,00.html

67.168.65.207 02:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

(Edit conflict)

I guess I'm missing something here. I see at least one spot where the article text matches text at the site www.diyexpat.com/visa%20guide/workpermits.html listed in your {{copyvio}} tag. The passage at diyexpat.com reads:

European countries may also have political or economic targets in controlling the number of work permits given out. For example, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Germany, France and Belgium have relatively strict criteria. Italy and Spain, on the other hand, may show more flexibility in certain areas deemed important for the local economy. These work permits often go by different names, although they may carry work permission, as a work permit does.

This seems to match exactly some text from the current article. For the record, here is a cut-and-paste:

European countries may also have political or economic targets in controlling the number of work permits given out. For example, the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Germany, France and Belgium have relatively strict criteria. Italy and Spain, on the other hand, may show more flexibility in certain areas deemed important for the local economy. These work permits often go by different names, although they may carry work permission, as a work permit does.

This text was added on 3 March 2007, diff of addition here, by User:Diyexpat, with edit summary "Added a few details on work permits in Europe. While I own the copyright on the material, I'm happy to share it." Is your issue that you wish to rescind the license to the text that you gave Wikipedia when you posted it? Or, are you objecting to its modification by other users – anything posted to Wikipedia can be freely paraphrased, edited, and copied anywhere as far as I know; those are the terms contributors agree to. --CliffC 02:31, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you should go back and read the rules Cliff, and not trust your interpretation of them. VivaBelgicaBE 00:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

That's not much of an answer to my questions, but yes, let's just wait for an admin to get here. --CliffC 02:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Would anyone complain if I took off the copyright violation tag?

67.168.65.207 (talk) 20:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, as you are the one that this is aimed at in the first place, and it doesn't seem that you have read the copyright infringement page since the notice was put up. It's up to an administrator to resolve the issue. VivaBelgicaBE 23:58, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Can we just remove the offending text? 67.168.65.207 06:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

With pastordavid removing the copyright dispute tag, I've sent an email to the copyright holder. ...(VivaBelgicaBE (talk) 23:43, 19 December 2007 (UTC))

The previous poster alerted me to the problems that have been going on here. If you want to put something up here, write it yourself. Diyexpat2 (talk) 00:14, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

copyvio claim – removed or edited comments

Before beginning any administrative review of the copyvio claim, for completeness please review this page's history so that talk page comments unilaterally removed or edited can be part of the process. Thanks. --CliffC (talk) 04:23, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Good heavens, there's spam on the page! Where's CliffC when we need him to police things for us?! Looks like I'll have to do this myself.TurboLvr09 (talk) 21:49, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

UK information extremely out of date

Also, section on au pairs is unclear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.94.51.137 (talk) 19:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

Why did you RV my changes?

Hello, I went and did a bunch of edits of Iranian Shias and corrected the country of birth and you ended up RVing pretty much all of them? What gives?

You even ended up RVing my source added to the SAVAK page!

Also, you failed to tell me how I "vandalized" Mohammad Reza Pahlavi page. He was born in the Sublime State of Persia yet you link it to just "Persia". Its like saying that Nazi Germany, East & West Germany, and current Germany is all the same Germany

I think you meant to post this on User:Work permit's talk page. This is the talk page for the Work permit encyclopedia article. Sneftel (talk) 11:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)