 | A fact from The Troopie appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 February 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
.svg)
Did you know nomination
edit- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Eddie891 (talk) 13:25, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
( )
.jpg)
The Trooper statue
... that when the Rhodesian Light Infantry's The Troopie statue (pictured) was unveiled, it was declared it would never be destroyed as long as an RLI soldier draws breath?Source: Statesman Journal
ALT1:... that the Rhodesian Light Infantry's The Troopie statue (pictured) was smuggled out of Rhodesia following the establishment of Zimbabwe prior to the regiment's disbanding? Source: Bush War Rhodesia 1966-1980. Helion Limited. p. 64. ISBN 1909982377
- Reviewed: Walt Whitman and Abraham Lincoln
- Comment: For 1 February (RLI's Regimental birthday)
Moved to mainspace by The C of E (talk). Self-nominated at 09:07, 13 January 2021 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
Looks good to go. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:05, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Why did you cross out the original without a reason? Personally, I much prefer the original as I think it is much more hooky and more appropriate for the regimental birthday. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- The C of E, because I found ALT0 hardly hooky at all, and because I felt that ALT1 was more appropriate for the regimental anniversary - being an example of action rather than a platitude - and because the sourcing for ALT1 seemed more reliable. If you didn't want ALT1 selecting, why did you offer it? If you would like to withdraw ALT1 I would be happy to re-review. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:51, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Why did you cross out the original without a reason? Personally, I much prefer the original as I think it is much more hooky and more appropriate for the regimental birthday. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
removed sentence
editI've removed this:
- At the dinner the day before the unveiling, the RLI's General John Hickman accused the Selous Scouts's Lieutenant-Colonel Ronald Reid-Daly of poaching ivory in the Zambezi Valley.[1][2]
It doesn't seem to have any relevance to the topic. jnestorius(talk) 13:20, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- It gives a little context that quite a few of the high ranking Rhodesian officers were present and was a small part of a minor scandal. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 13:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- It only says the RLI's General John Hickman was present, which is hardly surprising at the unveiling of an RLI memorial. If "quite a few of the high ranking Rhodesian officers were present" that should be stated directly with a source. The "minor scandal" gets one paragraph in each of the articles Ronald Reid-Daly and Selous Scouts, neither of which mention Hickman's dinner comments. To me that makes the "small part" too miniscule to mention here.
- You reverted my edit with summary "I disagree". Do you only disagree with removing this one sentence, or do you disagree with the other changes? In the latter case, please expand.
- jnestorius(talk) 14:47, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- The reason being I was trying to keep this a neutral article about a war memorial. I did not want to include racial elements in this to avoid UNDUE/WEIGHT. I also wanted to try to avoid overt politicising given the RLI existed and served before the Bush War started. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 15:53, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- A "neutral article about a war memorial" that doesn't mention the war being memorialised? Or the reason why it was feared the statue would be removed? Or the reason South Africa was the place it was moved to? That's not neutral, that's whitewashing. The RLI was founded in 1961. Does the monument list soldiers killed in the World Wars? jnestorius(talk) 16:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- OK, I am fine with mentioning the bush war if you think that is the main concern. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 16:14, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- A "neutral article about a war memorial" that doesn't mention the war being memorialised? Or the reason why it was feared the statue would be removed? Or the reason South Africa was the place it was moved to? That's not neutral, that's whitewashing. The RLI was founded in 1961. Does the monument list soldiers killed in the World Wars? jnestorius(talk) 16:10, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- The reason being I was trying to keep this a neutral article about a war memorial. I did not want to include racial elements in this to avoid UNDUE/WEIGHT. I also wanted to try to avoid overt politicising given the RLI existed and served before the Bush War started. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 15:53, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- I actually came here to suggest the same edit. The current version of this statement seems out of place and it doesn't have any obvious direct relationship with the subject of the article. TheBennsylvanian (talk) 15:27, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
References
- ^ "General lost battle of wills". The Observer. 1979-03-11. Retrieved 2021-01-13 – via Newspapers.com.
- ^ "Officers' quarrel ends in court". The Guardian. 1979-06-26. Retrieved 2021-01-13 – via Newspapers.com.