Talk:Democratic Action Party

DAP Membership

DAP is not a ethnic Chinese party as erroraneously described in this article but a multi-ethnic and multi-religious party open to all races, regardless White, Black, Brown, and Yellow. This is because DAP is based on Secularism, Socialism, and Malaysian Malaysia. Moreover, DAP is an political party accredited and certified by Socialist International. I find whoever wrote this article made the biggest lie in history to insult DAP, its members, and its supporters. Normally, any person who claims DAP is a Chinese-based or Chinese-led party is speaking a lie and they are usually from the racist Keadilan party or the Islamofascist PAS party. I have appropriately ammended this article and fixed the error.

What's sad is all the Chinese and Indians in Malaysia who support the National Front in spite of being treated like second class citizens by that Islamist bumiputra shit. Are they stupid enough to genuninely favour Islamist lunacy to the rationality of democratic socialism or are they scared of getting blown up by Islamist freaks if they don't back pro-bumiputra parties?

Well, roket, consists of Chinese ethnic. So they are chinese-major party, eventhough there got some indian in their party, and yes SOME, can be counted a finger. Malaysia is an ISLAMIC NATION, there's no question about, denial it, meaning you had denied the constitution, and denied ur rights to live in MALAYSIA, and ur citizenship. Tell me, where were roket during the CLC mission for Malaysia independant? those Chinese and Indians in Malaysia who support the National Front, is the one who bring Malaysia today, now see today, some group of INSECTs in Malaysia, try to fire racial sentiment and saying all the bad thing, and they are all the right thing lol. (not pointing at any group)--60.52.16.63 02:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Added a section header above. Please be reminded not to use wikipedia as a forum and refrain from personal attacks. Calling certain groups INSECTs -much as I dislike the group you are insulting- is not in the spirit of wikipedia. First IP user is also not assuming good faith by assuming an attack instead of proposing a change. I believe the article has now been rephrased to satisfy the first Ip user. Shon Lee (talk) 19:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Additional information required: Tanjong projects

Information on DAP's Tanjong projects, which were key party strategies, are absent. They should be included in this article. AppleJuggler (talk) 04:50, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

saman aje le

jgn bg muka kat umno, saman la —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.95.17.61 (talk) 09:31, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Democratic Action Party/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

GA review (see here for criteria):

I will review this article. Lampman (talk) 16:28, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

This seems like a typical early-day drive-by GA; the article is nowhere near GA status.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   It fails to follow WP:LAYOUT and the guidelines for list incorporation. There are far too many short paragraphs, and the lower half consists almost entirely of lists. If this information is important it should be moved to a stand-alone list article, with a link and a prose section in its place. The "2008 elections" part should not be written in the present tense.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   There are five dead references that I've marked of. Also, major parts are unreferenced, such as the entire "Pakatan Rakyat" and "Party symbol and its meaning" sections. "Pakatan Rakyat" also needs more context to be fully comprehensible to the uninitiated reader.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   While the history of the party is covered to a certain extent, there is nothing on ideology, party program etc.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   It's hard to believe there are no images to illustrate the article, such as pictures of central members etc.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Lampman (talk) 17:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Since no improvements have been made to the article over the last week, I will now delist it. Lampman (talk) 14:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). The material was copied from: http://pkrmalaysia.com/voices/blog/2008/04/02/pkr-dap-and-pas-to-consolidate-ties-with-coalition-by-royce-cheah/. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Mkativerata (talk) 23:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC)