Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Geometry guy (talk | contribs) at 00:34, 4 November 2007 (→History of South Africa in Apartheid: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive

• Archive of previous comments (????-September 2007)

Comments

Redirect

if you wish to discuss the Harare/Salisbury redirect issue, please contact me on my talk page, or the Harare discussion page.Sennen goroshi 17:48, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Perspicacite, Salisbury UK is an ancient city that still goes by that name, and when people are searching wikipedia it is much more likely they are looking for that one rather than the old capital of Zimbabwe. That is the reason for the redirect. Wizzy…☎ 08:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi Perspicacite, I have been reading up on the Salisbury/Harare issue and to be honest no one uses the Salisbury name for Harare any more as Harare is now the more common and official name. I have to agree with Wizzy that people searching for Salisbury are more likely to want Salisbury UK than Harare and I think that a link a the top of the Salisbury UK page to Harare should be included. Sorry, I know that this is your express intention but to be fair Salisbury UK is where the redirect should go. Mangwanani 16:08, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

PMOI

I've tried to get protection before, but the level of vandalism is not high enough. It's frustrating that it's the same people posting the same POV. If it keeps up, I might try getting at least one editor blocked. Dchall1 21:31, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Edit Warring on MDC

We ave settled our deferences with Fys on the MDC,My problem was that he was removing sourced material,which is against the pillars of Wiki.But you should see the development I have made on the MDC article and other Zimbabweanand South African articles in general.Africa Festival —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 16:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Demographic Analysis

It does not make sense to redirect Demographic Analysis to Demography. The methods of Demographic Analysis are used in a wide range of fields: education, historical comparative research, the study of firms, turnover and population ecology. The methods warrant their own discussion, as well as a review of the contemporary application of the methods to a variety of social scientific questions. Please do not issue redirects to pages without discussion first. Thanks. --Htw3 18:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• Hi-- I believe Dr. Clark offers a high quality introduction to the methods in question: http://faculty.washington.edu/samclark/Soc433/. Of course, many of the methods developed to answer questions of human population dynamics have been applied to other fields. Notably, firms, organizations, institutions, institutional forms; as well as turnover retention within organizations; and social networks all benefit from methods developed originally in demography. Finally, demographic analysis is not the same thing as the field of demography. Most graduate courses in demography are topically focused and the methods are applied well beyond those topics. --Htw3 02:04, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Gibson Sibanda

Hi.

I noticed that you have been helping me assess the Zimbabwe-related articles. Thanks. However, I just noticed one article Gibson Sibanda as being rated B class. This article is no where near B class, in fact it is only just outside of stub class. I hope this is the only article that has been assessed incorrectly...

If you are unsure please refer to the assessment page.

It still has a stub template on it and I am weary of even making it a start class article as it is so short.

Just thought I would draw your attention to this matter.

Mangwanani 16:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• There's nowhere near enough information for it to be a B class. Even if the topic is a fairly small one it is still the amount of content that sets it up as the certain class. If you aren't sure what to rate them as then just put the {{WPZW}} template on and I shall rate it as i work my way through the unassessed articles. Thanks for your continued help.Mangwanani 17:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Rudy Giuliani controversies additions

Excellant work!!

You'd probably appreciate watching Kevin Keating's documentary on his mayoralty, Giuliani Time. Dogru144 00:13, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Cess

Although UrbanDIctionary barely qualifies as a "reliable source" per WP:RS, remember that these are guidelines first and foremost. WP:VERIFY and WP:NOR are the relevant policies that apply to this issue, and the edit and sourcing that had been put in for the slang definition of Cess fall within the limits stipulated in both of these policies. In particular, my caveat is that UrbanDictionary is one of the few organizations dedicated to documenting vernacular phrases, idioms and other slang terms that have yet to be adopted by the mainstream population. When an article is edited and a definition of this type added, UrbanDictionary should be considered a reliable source. --CespiT 15:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Guan Shengdi

Just a friendly heads up on Guan Shengdi. I removed your speedy tag, as this seems to be for real. A gsearch for "Guan Sheng di" (with a space in the last word) gives several sources that look (to my unexpert eye) to be legit. Is there something else going on with this subject that I'm not seeing that would lead to a need for deletion?--Fabrictramp 22:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

WPRhodesia

Hi. I have started a sub-WikiProject for Rhodesian articles. May be easier to have one department working on Rhodesian articles and another on Zimbabwean. Time will tell... When working through Zimbabwe articles if you come across an article that is relevant to Rhodesia please change the assessment box so that it reads {{WPZW|Rhodesia=yes}} and therefore listed as an article for the new Rhodesian WikiProject.

You have been invited to join the Rhodesia task force, a collaborative effort focused on improving Misplaced Pages's coverage of Rhodesia. If you'd like to join, just add your name to the member list. Thanks for reading!

Mangwanani 16:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Human rights in Eritrea

In this page you have made numerous POV edits without discussion. Please discuss, and do not introduce POV into the article. Also, do not remove PoV labels. --Merhawie 01:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Hadith

I did not warn you for vandalism. Rather, I asked you to use the talk page as you reverted many good faith edits. As for Aterkmani, he was exhibiting the same behaviour as he did on Post which I consider vandalism. --NeilN 06:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Re Aterkmani. Then we disagree. That's fine. --NeilN 06:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Bad Faith Assumption?

Did you really just accuse me of vandalism? In my haste, perhaps I thought the obit was already attached to the article, because it was listed on the recent deaths page, but here it is, although the date was wrong, he was indeed dead, so it's hardly vandalism. I think you might want to review WP:AGF. Cheers, CP 21:18, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Zimbabwe GA

Hi. I was wondering if you would like to have a quick look at the Zimbabwe article. I have been doing a lot of work on it based on the comments given after the last GA review. It read:

I am of the opinion that as a team we have met all these points bar one - the one about moving the Topics of Zimbabwe out of the See Also section. I have not done this as Russia, Germany, South Africa, United Kingdom and other countries have this box in the See Also section.

Before I put the article forward again for GA review I would appreciate your thoughts on the matter. Thanks. Mangwanani 21:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

History of South Africa in Apartheid

It was not a drive-by de-listing. Another editor pointed out the article's low quality a while ago. You all have had ample time to improve the article and chose not to. Not my problem. The article never should have been given GA status in the first place. Stop complaining. Perspicacite 00:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I am not an editor of this article, so the fact that you address me as "you all" demonstrates that you have not been paying attention, and proves my point that you have not acted responsibly.. You did not provide the oldid and you made a mess of the article history template, so I had to fix it for you (in fact that was the only reason I came to the page). I don't care whether the article should have been GA or not in the first place. You do not correct a bad listing by making a bad delisting. You do it properly, with proper attention to detail. Be better than the editors you criticise, not worse. Geometry guy 00:34, 4 November 2007 (UTC)