Talk:Apartheid

; Archives
	At old location: Talk:Apartheid/Israel; Talk:Apartheid/Archive1; Talk:Apartheid/Archive2; Talk:Apartheid/Archive3; Talk:Apartheid/Archive4; Talk:Apartheid/Archive5; Talk:Apartheid/Archive6; At current location: Archive 1 (2005/09/03); Archive 2 (2006/05/16); Archive 3 (2007/01/15);

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Apartheid article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

Wikipedia:Africa-related regional notice board/template

Software: Computing Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Template:FAOL

Apartheid received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Apartheid has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: No date specified. To provide a date use: {{GA|insert date in any format here}}.

Mandela: The Authorised Biography

I am trying to expand this article, mainly focusing on the differences between this book and other accounts (books and otherwise) of Mandela's life and South Africa throughout this period. Any comments or suggestions are appreciated on the peer review page: "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/Mandela:_The_Authorised_Biography" BillMasen 17:39, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chronological Order

Since this is a history page, shouldn't there be some sort of chronological sequence to things? In its current state, it is difficult to see a clear progression of events in the article. I suggest a timeline or a resequencing of the subjects contained, unless somebody can think of a good reason against this course of action. 169.229.112.135 04:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Separate but equal

The phrase "separate but equal" was definitely used by the apartheid government - do a quick Google search for the term. Greenman 08:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that search reveals the phrase used in an actual quote from an apartheid government official. If you like, I'll leave the claim in the article but with a {{uncited}} tag. If the claim of separate but equal was made, it was disingenuous - a lie. The entire implementation of apartheid, and any number of quotes from Verwoerd and others, show that equality was not part of its mission. "What is the use of teaching a Bantu child mathematics", "Die wit man bly baas" (the white man stays boss), etc. Zaian 09:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DF Malan was horrified at the idea of separate but equal - see this 1953 Time magazine article. Zaian 09:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. See also [1] which mentions the wording of the separate amenities act (separate but not necessarily equal). Of course it was a lie in actuality, but the aim was used as a moral justification. I've also added {{uncited}} to the separate but equal article, so we can see if that attracts a reliable source. Greenman 17:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the Union Flag

I would like to propose the removal of the Union Flag from the article. The flag is wrongly associated with the apartheid regime. Although it was the national flag of South Africa during apartheid, the flag is wrongly associated with the laws and attitudes of the apartheid government. It was the flag of the people of South Africa, many of whom did not agree with what was happening. The flag was first raised 20 years before apartheid was instigated and as such deserves more respect. It is insensitive to include it in such an article considering it's beginnings. It was politically neutral as it was the first flag representing South Africa's independance from colonial powers. Use of the flag in the apartheid article propogates stereotypes and misconceptions that those who still respect the flag are 'anti-black' apartheid-style Afrikaaners. 196.209.12.28 19:33, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(By "Union Flag" I think you mean the SA flag from 1928-1994, not the Union Flag of the UK.)

I don't think it's inappropriate to include in this article. For some people perhaps it was politically neutral, but many others on both sides saw it (and continue to see it) as a symbol of apartheid. Zaian 22:14, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The flag should stay. I'm not sure what you mean by 'wrongly' associated with the apartheid regime. For the entire existence of apartheid this was the flag used by the government, and it's strongly seen that way today. It would be detrimental to the article to remove the national flag of the time. Greenman 18:34, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HIV/Aids

I'm removing the HIV/Aids section. Apartheid did a lot of wrong to the country, but it is absurd to believe that it was the cause of the problem in South Africa today. The government cannot be blamed for miners sleeping with prostitutes, even if the miners only went home once a month. Going home once a month does not relate to sleeping with a prostitute in any way.