Talk:Meermin slave mutiny

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Nortonius in topic April 2019
Good articleMeermin slave mutiny has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
November 4, 2011Good article nomineeListed
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on February 18, 2012, February 18, 2014, February 18, 2015, February 18, 2016, February 18, 2017, February 18, 2019, February 18, 2021, February 18, 2022, and February 18, 2023.

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Meermin slave mutiny. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

 Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:28, 1 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

April 2019

edit

While I don't want to get into the sort of lengthy discussion that has occurred regarding this article in the past, I'd like to give a brief explanation for why I reverted this edit. I'm a fan of tightening writing, and I believe I saw some good examples of it in that edit. I'm also a fan of simple reference formatting, so I don't object to changes from the harvnb template to the sfn. But, in such a large edit, it is difficult to follow the reasoning behind what looks like some pretty wholesale removal of citations. If that is not what happened, feel free to explain. More worrying is the inconsistent removal of italics from the "names" Massavana and Koesaaij. The italics remained in the lead, but were removed below; and the reason for the italics is explained in note "nb 1" at their first occurrence, in the lead. The italics were arrived at after considerable discussion: see here, and a briefer explanation here. Again, in such a large edit, if one such inconsistency is found, it is hard to have faith in the rest. Nortonius (talk) 09:55, 16 April 2019 (UTC)Reply