Wikipedia talk:WikiProject South Africa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject South Africa (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

More eyes on History of South Africa please[edit]

It has been heaviliy edited by an IP over a sustained period of several weeks, with very few contributions by others in the same period, thus it is at risk of WP:OWN problems. This is one of this project's fundamental articles so needs to be watched. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:26, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Last time I looked, the relevant article talk page had had 99 "watchers". Presumably a similar number are watching edits to the article itself. Several of those watchers have obviously been monitoring recent edits to that article over the "sustained" period Roger (Dodger67) (talk) is expressing concern about. A few of those editors who are monitoring recent edits to the article have diligently and helpfully removed several vandal edits by other IP users geo-located in the United States. The aforementioned watchers have raised no challenges or objections to the quality or content of the good-faith edits Roger (Dodger67) (talk) is referring to. I suggest Roger (Dodger67) (talk) is possibly misinterpreting or overlooking some specific provisions of WP:OWN. (talk) 13:46, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Interested parties may care to note that before the recent good-faith edits referred to above, the History of SA article (which is officially categorised as being of Vital Importance), had earlier been demoted from Good Article status to C-class status. This probably due to fact that the article had, over the years, become dissimulated through extensive unreferenced (and possibly plagiarised) original research, obvious POV, and multiple other issues including repetition and a lack of cohesive structure. I suggest the recent good-faith edits, about which Dodger67 is now raising concerns, have improved the article quite substantially. It is not clear why Roger (Dodger67) (talk has himself apparently not raised previously any concerns nor taken remedial action about the poor state of the article prior to the recent improvements, of which he is now expressing concern. (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
@User: my concern is that you appear to be on a "lone ranger" mission to rewrite the article according to what you alone deem to be "the truth". As far as I can see you've never made any attempt to recruit the participation or opinions of other editors, a vital article should not be a solo effort. In particular South African history is prone to controversy and "revisionism" for reasons that should be obvious to anyone with even a little knowlege of the subject. As for my lack of substantive contribution, I'm not a general history specialist, it's outside my comfort zone. By the way, I really do not appreciate the sarcastic way you have repeatedly mentioned and overlinked my username in your post above - the issue is not personal, it's procedural. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Dodger67, The edits were not "my truth" but were based on reliable and verifiable sources. That is how wikipedia works. If anyone has reliable and verifiable sources that contradict my particular sources, they are of course free to contribute those sources. That is also how wikipedia works, in the interests of neutrality and encyclopedic content.
As regards your claim that I have "never made any attempt to recruit the participation or opinions of other editors", you are invited to refer to the relevant article talk page, and to your very own user talk page.
Meanwhile, the article at issue still has lots of room for improvement, if anyone is interested, including your good self.
Incidentally, the revisionist approach to history is a valid and universally accepted paradigm in the field of historiography. There is no need to infer a derogatory meaning or place the word in parenthesis, or equate it with conspiracy theory. I am not responsible for the particular way history has unfolded in SA. (talk) 14:16, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
I dont know why I am only responding to this discussion now, 3 months later, because history of South Africa articles are usually something I am pretty interested in. My first suggestion to User: is to please get a username. Having a user name goes a long way to increasing a sense of accountability when editing Wikipedia and so increases the likelihood that other editors will no treat your edits with skepticism. The other issue, and this is a general issue that is no one's fault per say, is that the page as a whole is not very informative not as informative as it could/should be in addition to having a couple of POV issues. I had a conversation a few days ago with a head-librarian at a major research library which was all about how uninformative he found this article on giving an informative summary about the history of the country and how it came to be. I think that says as much about where we are (or are not) as a country in figuring out exactly what the South African story/narrative is as well as the other a fore mentioned issues.--Discott (talk) 11:01, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Cabinets of South Africa[edit]

The current page about History of the Cabinet of South Africa is haphazard and clumsy. Rather than having a single page about all cabinets till date, it is better to classify these cabinets by their leaders as the case is for Template:British ministries and Template:Indian union ministries. Need opinion of this Project's members. -Karan Kamath (talk · contribs)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Karan Kamath (talkcontribs) 12:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I agree the article needs to be deleted once we have individual articles for each cabinet. Those two examples are a good start, but South Africa has a much more complex past. Do we include all the SWA and SA "Bantustans"? What about all the Boer Republics and the Cape Colony? My suggestion is to create templates for Template:Republic of South Africa Cabinets (starting from 1961, excl Bantustans) and Template:Union of South Africa Cabinets (from 1910 - 1961) to start with. Then have templates and articles for each Bantustan, Dutch Cape Colony, Cape Colony, Boer Republics, Kingdoms and the Cape Qualified Franchise cabinet or committee. - That Video Shop Guy (talk) (15:57, 8 September 2015 (UTC))

Cape (Town) Philharmonic Orchestra[edit]

Does anyone know if the Cape Philharmonic Orchestra has changed its name to the Cape Town Philharmonic Orchestra, and if so, when and why? Please comment at Talk:Cape Philharmonic Orchestra#Requested move 3 July 2015. --Deskford (talk) 16:53, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

I believe they are still known as the "Cape Town Philharmonic Orchestra." At least thats what their website seems to indicate.--Discott (talk) 06:17, 26 July 2015 (UTC)


Talk:Greyshirt#Requested_move_20_July_2015 In ictu oculi (talk) 01:22, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

cf reopened at Talk:Greyshirt (comics) In ictu oculi (talk) 13:13, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

AfC submission[edit]

Could someone have a look at Draft:AmaTshatshu? Thanks, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:40, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Help with article[edit]

Hi everyone, on the project page, it is stated that there are many red linked articles for the List of Acts of the Parliament of South Africa. I have decided to start seeing if I can make some headway with these articles.

I have started with the first one, South African Language Practitioners' Council Act, 2014, but I need a lot of help as I am still pretty new to this. For a start I do not know specifically how to fix the referencing so that when a reference is used more than once, it will only be shown once.

I am also not sure to what extent the provisions of the act need to be discussed.

Any help and input of this would be much appreciated. Especially on how I can improve as I want to see us slowly get these acts done, but I want them to still be up to standard articles.

Kind regards, --DSBennie (talk) 01:37, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Have a look at Repeated citations and Footnotes: using a source more than once --NJR_ZA (talk) 05:17, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
@DSBennie - have a look at how it looks now. Use the Provelt's "add a reference" function at the bottom of the editing page to create a reference for the reference type you have sourced the information from. Regards Paul Conlinp (talk) 09:45, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
You will have to add ProveIt as a gadget under Preferences first if you haven't already Gbawden (talk) 09:54, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you everyone, really appreciate the advice and help. The next article I have created is the Military Veterans Act, 2011, would appreciate you guys going over it to fix up any problems or issues, would also appreciate any advice on anywhere I am going wrong content wise. regards, --DSBennie (talk) 22:38, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Acts of the Parliament of South Africa[edit]

I have been looking through a number of the acts of parliament listed under List_of_Acts_of_the_Parliament_of_South_Africa. While some act are notable deserving of their own articles, many of the acts are not notable enough to extend past being a stub as there is very little information for the act other than the act itself.

What I would like to recommend is that instead of having List of Acts of the Parliament of South Africa, 1910–19, we have a single article for each year, named something on the lines of Acts of the Parliament of South Africa (1910). Within that article we could list the acts passed in that year with a description of the act and information on when it was passed, assented to, repealed or amended ect. Articles of greater importance and notability can be linked to within these articles. That way were are not left with a great number of stubs, but are also not left with an endless list of red linked articles, such as the before mentioned, List of Acts of the Parliament of South Africa, 1910–19

Input and consensus on this proposal would much appreciated. --DSBennie (talk) 00:35, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

The List of Acts of the Parliament of South Africa series was modelled on List of Acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom - I'm just saying that to explain that the "long list of red-links" approach wasn't purely my own invention. If you want to write expanded list/articles with more information I'm all for it.
Something else that could be done to reduce red links, is to make sure that where there's an article for a principal act (e.g. Copyright Act, 1978) then the amendment acts (e.g. Copyright Amendment Act, 1992) are redirected to the pricipal act's article. Optimally there should then also be some mention of amendments in the article.
Also, there are some whole series of acts where the individual title could be redirected to a single article describing the context. For example all the Appropriation Acts could be redirected to the appropriation bill article; similarly the annual Division of Revenue Acts. - htonl (User:Htonl) 17:12, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@Htonl That makes a lot more sense than my suggestion thank you, I will look into what acts should be redirected to others--DSBennie (talk) 18:48, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Hey, your idea sounds like a good idea also. It would be a hell of a lot of work to do it completely, though! - htonl (talk) 21:28, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


See Draft:Boeber. Thank you, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 22:09, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

SA userboxes needed[edit]

South Africa needs more userboxes for it's users, believe me! Some can express themselves by using userboxes. Ras Benjih/RasTalk 08:44, 31 Jul 06:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Parktown North[edit]

Thank-you WikiProject for having a section for our suburb. Please note that the Residents Association has had a change of website and can now be found on and NOT on the link. Thank-you. :) Administrator of the Parktown North Residents Association (PNRA) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

List of Heritage Sites in South Africa Update[edit]

I was looking at Wiki Loves Monuments South Africa, which is running this month, this initiative links to the List of heritage sites in South Africa, while going through these lists I picked up that the tables are very incomplete.

So what I did was I updated all the coordinates on the List of heritage sites in South Africa and all its sub-pages using the South African Heritage Resources Agency website.

The code I used as well as a write up on what I did can be found on my GitHub.

While going through the pages I fixed some obvious mistakes here and there, added interwiki links, but there is still a lot to be done on these pages. For example a lot of the descriptions in the tables are broken sentences, which we definitely need to look at.

Before I started updating all the coordinates I contacted user Effeietsanders whom started all these pages using an Excel Spreadsheet. He can't remember where he got it from, but all the info in there he originally created the pages from, which has the broken descriptions as is. He did send me this Excel Spreadsheet to have a look.

For a lot of the Heritage Sites the description on the SAHRA website is complete, but it seems like what we have is broken but you do recognize that the text comes from this source, it's just shuffled and the sentences broken off.

Just like I did for the coordinates we can update the descriptions, but over the years users have slowly been fixing the broken sentences, so I did not just want to replace everything, because we can't just lose those changes?

So if anyone has any ideas or plans on how we can improve these lists, I am very willing to help. I'm just scared to make too many changes like just programatically updating all the descriptions.

Another thing every site has a page on SAHRA and just on the Stellenbosch page users added 11 references from the Site Reference to their respective pages on SAHRA, which I removed because they used the '/nodes' and not the useful '/sites' url. So yes this is something I can go and add, being the correct reference to every Site Reference in each table, but do we really want 300+ references on all of these pages? Instead of just the External Link to SAHRA?

--Johanvanl (talk) 10:30, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi Johanvanl, thank you very much for doing this. It is greatly appreciated. Heritage Western Cape has provided a little bit of funding for Wikimedia ZA to hire an intern (HeritageIntern2) to focus on Heritage sites in the Western Cape only and she has been working on improving the Western Cape database since August and should be finishing off in the next week or two. She was tasked with finding GPS coordinates for Western Cape sites that had addresses but no GPS coordinates and, if she had time, clean up some of the terrible descriptions. She does also have a spreadsheet of about 1000 additional sites from HWC. I am not very good with programatic updating so I was wondering if you might be able to update the list with the new sites if you get a chance?--Discott (talk) 18:17, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey Discott this is great, I am very willing to help anytime, just drop me a message via email (linked on my user page) or here. Johanvanl (talk) 22:23, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

10th Cape Town meetup[edit]

Hello everyone, this is just everyone in the Cape Town/Western Cape area know that the 10th Cape Town meetup will be happening this Sunday 4th October 2015. Anyone interested in Wiki related stuff including and especially Wikipedia are welcome to join us. I can guarantee free coffee as usual. For more information check out the meetup page on Wikipedia at the link here.

In brief the details are:

  • Time and Date: 11:00-14:00, Sunday 4th October
  • Location: Truth Coffee, 36 Buitenkant St, Cape Town 8000, South Africa

Cheers, --Discott (talk) 09:52, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

RfC at Homo naledi[edit]

Interested editors are invited to comment at Talk:Homo_naledi#RfC:_a_dozen_articles_rejected_by_Nature. --Animalparty! (talk) 07:21, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Cherry-picking a person for the lede of an article[edit]

Two men going thru the Superman Crawl and onwards to discover a major fossil trove in South Africa, are havin their achievement downplayed while attempts [1] are being made at cherry-picking someone else into the lede of the article. Are there any points to be added? Here to sway (talk) 10:45, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

This looks like you're trying to canvass opinion with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way, which, as WP:CANVASS explains, is not allowed. There is already a neutrally-worded notification of the Homo naledi RFC immediately above. - htonl (talk) 12:35, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
I am looking for more viewpoints in the linked discussion. If you feel that I have given slanted information etc. you might consider adding information here to offset any perceived slant - without your editing resulting in a slant. Here to sway (talk) 00:13, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

In this [2] version I have added the name of the two discoverers into the article lede in conjunction with cherrypicked co-author - amongst 47 co-authors. Here to sway (talk) 13:36, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

One of 47 co-authors in - South Africa's president being removed from article[edit]

Discussion at Talk:Homo_naledi#President.27s_reaction_notable_for_Homo_naledi.3F. --Here to sway (talk) 15:16, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Editing Human Rights in South Africa Page[edit]

Hi, I am working on a project at my University and my proposal is to revise the “Human rights in South Africa” page, and the “South Africa” page. On the “Human Rights in South Africa” page I intend to add sections concerning Education, Post apartheid issues, and issues with human rights in the workplace. Under the education heading, I plan to have a subheading pertaining to children with disabilities. Similarly, under the post apartheid issues heading, I plan to create a subheading for poverty and socioeconomic issues. Furthermore, for the human rights in the workplace heading, I plan to focus on how employees are treated and their benefits from companies. Additionally, I would add a section on human rights to the South Africa page. This section would focus most heavily on poverty, but I would mention other human rights violations as well. I would also provide a link to the “Human Rights in South Africa” article. Patience456 (talk) 20:22, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi Patience456 please add the relevant WikiEd course template to the article's talk page. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 23:00, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Roger (Dodger67) there is a link to the course page at the top of the talk page of my article. By using the link, you can get more information than the template provides. Thanks! Patience456 (talk) 16:23, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi Patience456, you're doing a good job, but I've noticed a few style problems. Per the WP:ENGVAR rules spelling and vocabulary must follow the conventions of South African English, which is mostly the same as British English - "labour", not "labor", public "transport", not "transportation", "organisation" rather than "organization". Then there are a few neutrality issues - the article contains unattributed opinions when it uses words such as "in fact" or "fortunately". Starting sentences with "however" and "in fact" too often is also a style problem, these words should only be used to introduce a contrast or contradiction of the preceding statement. On a personal note, I would really like to see more on disability rights, you cover the issue under child education very well, but have not yet mentioned disability in terms of tertiary education, healthcare rights, employment, environmental and transport accessibility, information access, etc. The Disability in South Africa article contains some useful information and sources. Hope you find these comments useful. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:04, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions! I will work on them. Patience456 (talk) 22:14, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia Primary School Project[edit]

Hello ! I just joined the Primary School Project and will be the community liaison for it :) If you have any questions, please contact me.

I wanted to take that opportunity to outline that, as part of the project, we received and expert review for 4 articles. It would be lovely if you could have a look at them, and even better put a bit of energy in the improvement of these articles (they DO need the attention). The articles are

The reviews are posted in the talk page.


Anthere (talk)

Wikipedia Primary School Project[edit]

Hi everybody. As part of the Wikipedia Primary School research project, I would like to announce that the article Children's Act, 2005 (which is listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject South Africa) was selected a while ago as an article to be reviewed by an external expert. We'd now like to ask interested editors to join our efforts and improve the article before October 31, 2015 (any timezone) as they see fit; a revision will be then sent to the designated expert for review. Any notes and remarks written by the external expert will be made available on this page under a CC-BY-SA license as soon as possible, so that you can read them, discuss them and then decide if and how to use them. Please sign up here to let us know you're collaborating. Thanks a lot for your support! --Anthere (talk) 14:22, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

Wikimedia South Africa AGM[edit]

This is to notify everyone that the Wikimedia South Africa Annual General Meeting will be held on Saturday the 28th November 2015.

If you are unable to attend the event in person in Cape Town then please let me know so I can organise a Google Hangout event so you can join electronically.


Date: Saturday, 28th November 2015
Time: 10:00 - 13:00
Location: TwentyFifty, 2nd Floor, 8 Spin Street, Cape Town. (just above the "Bread, Milk, and Honey" cafe')

Due to the fact that a number of the directors of Wikimedia South Africa could not attend on any other date it was agreed that we would host the event in late November instead of early November. It was agreed to host this AGM in Cape Town again so as to coincide with the award ceremony for Wiki Loves Monuments (which will be on the same day) as well as to best serve the wishes expressed at the last Wiki-meetup in Cape Town. We also have a readily available space in Cape Town to host the AGM.

You can RSVP or send your appologives at the meetup page on Meta.Wiki here.

Thanks, --Discott (talk) 18:10, 22 October 2015 (UTC)


Hello everyone, I have just created a page for the #FeesMustFall student protests and it is still in need of a great deal of attention to get it to a respectable quality. It is far from complete and I am sure I missed a whole bunch of stuff about the protest and possible event got one or two things wrong. I would greatly appricate some help on getting this article up to scratch. Thanks, Discott (talk) 18:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

South African National Census of 2011[edit]

I have just done a minor fix at South African National Census of 2011, I am quite worried about the poor state of such an important article - several sections have apparently not been touched since shortly after the census data was collected. The article barely discusses the results/reports of the census. We need to put in a bit of effort to fix it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:57, 19 November 2015 (UTC)