- 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The result was: withdrawn by nominator, closed by BorgQueen (talk) 10:58, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Archie Mafeje
.jpg)
Archie looking “non traditional”
- ... that Archie Mafeje's job offer was rescinded to not "flout the accepted traditional outlook of South Africa?" Source: http://www.news.uct.ac.za/article/-2020-01-10-student-sit-in-of-1968-the-final-straw
- Reviewed:
- Comment: I will understand if the hook was changed. Dark humour can be confused with being cold
Moved to mainspace by FuzzyMagma (talk). Self-nominated at 20:23, 4 January 2023 (UTC).
I just reviewed this for WP:Good article status. It was a WP:QUICKFAIL, see Talk:Archie Mafeje/GA1. Considering the rather extensive issues noted therein, I would suggest withdrawing this nomination. In short, this is far from being in a state where it could be linked from the WP:Main page. Ping nominator FuzzyMagma. TompaDompa (talk) 05:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Since the article was moved to the mainspace on December 30, it is still eligible for DYK. It should not have been rejected above. Flibirigit (talk) 14:26, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- The issue was not eligibility but quality, as I said. TompaDompa (talk) 17:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- TompaDompa I have addressed and done all of the copy editings. there are two points that you have brought up but that I can defend (especially, Archie Mafeje#Research and ideology. FuzzyMagma (talk) 15:37, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's good that you have done copyediting, though some issues I brought up remain and the list of issues was as I said not exhaustive but merely a sample. I will re-add the maintenance tag. If you intend to go forward with this DYK nomination rather than withdraw it, it should be reviewed by someone other than me; I am not sufficiently familiar with the topic and sources to be able to confidently say when the article is neutral, though I can tell that the current version that says in WP:WikiVoice that the subject's work
led to a much-needed examination of the discipline's founding principles
isn't. TompaDompa (talk) 17:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)- for Archie Mafeje#Research and ideology you are welcome to check the sources, these are their voices not mine. You maybe think the examination was not needed but that is not the academic are saying. Decolonization of knowledge is a thing. As for the nomination I want to go ahead with it as it’s well sourced (there is even an image of the news article). I appreciate you feedback and my copy edit was not limited to your feedback but I will your tag. It’s a learning process so sorry for the hiccups ..FuzzyMagma (talk) 16:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not saying anything about whether it was needed one way or the other, I'm saying that Wikipedia should not be stating it as fact. Again, I suggest judicious use of WP:INTEXT attribution.About the image: I'm by no means an expert at copyright, but I noticed that while it's tagged as public domain, the Commons page says that
A South African work that is in the public domain in South Africa according to this rule is in the public domain in the U.S. only if it was in the public domain in South Africa in 1996, e.g. if it was published before 1946 and no copyright was registered in the U.S.
The image does not seem to meet those criteria?
Alright, let's let someone else take a stab at reviewing this. TompaDompa (talk) 18:20, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not saying anything about whether it was needed one way or the other, I'm saying that Wikipedia should not be stating it as fact. Again, I suggest judicious use of WP:INTEXT attribution.About the image: I'm by no means an expert at copyright, but I noticed that while it's tagged as public domain, the Commons page says that
- for Archie Mafeje#Research and ideology you are welcome to check the sources, these are their voices not mine. You maybe think the examination was not needed but that is not the academic are saying. Decolonization of knowledge is a thing. As for the nomination I want to go ahead with it as it’s well sourced (there is even an image of the news article). I appreciate you feedback and my copy edit was not limited to your feedback but I will your tag. It’s a learning process so sorry for the hiccups ..FuzzyMagma (talk) 16:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
- It's good that you have done copyediting, though some issues I brought up remain and the list of issues was as I said not exhaustive but merely a sample. I will re-add the maintenance tag. If you intend to go forward with this DYK nomination rather than withdraw it, it should be reviewed by someone other than me; I am not sufficiently familiar with the topic and sources to be able to confidently say when the article is neutral, though I can tell that the current version that says in WP:WikiVoice that the subject's work
- no need. I withdraw my nomination including the other two [1] [2] nominations. I really don’t have energy for arguments tbh. Thnx anyway FuzzyMagma (talk)