This article is within the scope of WikiProject Universities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of universities and colleges on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Neutrality discussion on controversy: links on intimidation against white students brings balance to the section. Without it reads a little bit like a warped POV. The follow-up is necessary. Teatreez (talk) 12:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Yes, 'some' degree of followup of all sides is certainly necessary. What seems odd, to me, is that there is one paragraph on the original incident, followed by three (albeit shorter) paragraphs on alleged intimidation/threats against white students. There is very little followup on anything else (like the claims that "it was just a joke", for example). It seems rather unbalanced. - htonl (talk) 12:39, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Ok, you're right, it needs to be more streamlined I agree. Teatreez (talk) 14:28, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
I agree it has problems - not sure why Serfontein deleted it entirely, though. I would have already reverted the changes, but I don't want to lose post-reversion edits that improved the article. I'll figure something out soon enough. ManicParroT (talk) 02:51, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
I manually reinserted the section on the controversy.