This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am still busy writing the article on the professor, but someone just could not wait to jump upon one with their tags of multiple issues or whatever. Could you not give one some breathing space? Eeeesh, to whom could I report such annoying eagerness? This article is not a self publicaton to begin with. My surname is not De Beer and am busy with an article about an important journalism academic on the South African scene. I have never met the person personally, only talked on Facebook and e-mail. More links to sources are forthcoming. Mieliestronk ( talk) 21:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC) (Ollie Olwagen from South Africa, where we have enough troubles with everything from state corruption up to covid, and really do not need more teeny irritations such as these even if they seem small to some. Have a nice day, Mamushir.)
User:Mieliestronk admits twice that he was in contact with the subject. He further cites himself as the creator of the subject's photo, and possibly got the birth date and place from the subject himself. On the Afrikaans geselshoekie he writes: "I myself decided to write about him and informed him, as our emails will show," as above, "only talked on Facebook and e-mail". JMK ( talk) 13:01, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
JMK ( talk) 15:33, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Just to explain some of one's intentions: I've had previous experiences regarding the deep entanglement one could get onself into just trying to post a mere snapshot to Wikipedia. So I wrote to the subject: Please bequeath, bestow, award and hand over (!) your copyright to me and make me the owner of your picture, then there skould be no problem, as far as I understand South African law. And he said: Ok, proceed. I can show our emails in this regard to whom it may concern. All above board and having no strings whatsoever attached.
But, yes: If one should "know" a person, does that mean one could not write about him on her on Wikipedia? How many miriads of contributors of articles must have "known" their subject at least in some way? I virtually came to "know" the person when telling him on Facebook/Messenger I needed to write about him. I did not know of any other way I could approach the article save for making contact with the person himself in the first place. What else could I have done? I was just trying to get articles written on Afrikaans journalists in various fields in South Africa in the past years. And he was the only Afrikaans journalist I could think of whose academic contributions outshine even his contributions to newspapers or periodicals themselves. Nothing more. I have never met the subject in person, and that is a fact I could swear by. Why should I have any other intention of furthering his cause than the journalistic angle? I am sure that is what is meant by the Wikipedia spirit of good faith. is it not?
Furthermore about the Broederbond: JMK has his own opinion about the matter which seems to be politically driven, I really don't know. And implying that our respected Academy of the Afrikaans Language have been racist in all their decades of existence, hurts an Afrikaner like me more than I think he could ever imagine. All the many prizes won by most respected writers of all colours and creeds in Afrikaans, Adam Small et al, all of them were awarded by a dirty racist organization? Repeat this accusation on a wider platform and see what the reaction would be. But so be it if somebody believes so. I have no interest other than stating the facts.
@ Greenman:, one would very much like to hear your opinion, please. Asseblief tog. Ek is 'n ou man wat reeds voor die Tweede Wêreldoorlog gebore is. Waarom ek in elk geval soveel moeite doen om die verhaal van die Afrikaanse joernalistiek op 'n wêreldforum vasgelê te probeer kry, kan ek maar net toeskryf aan my liefde vir my moedertaal wat miskien ook maar net gedoem is om spoedig uit te sterf in die huidige wêreldbestel. Kortom, is daar 'n manier om die nuwe besware verwyder te kry wat nou weer bo-aan die artikel verskyn wat jy self goedgekeur het? Daar kan tog nie 'n ewige gestry oor artikels wees nie, want op die ou end is niemand tevrede met enige ander persoon se bydraes nie. Mieliestronk ( talk) 12:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
— Note: An editor has expressed a concern that editors have been
canvassed to this discussion.
Editors may like to take note of the canvassing employed to publish this article in main space and to dissuade subsequent scrutiny. On 7 February 2021 user:Mieliestronk posts the following non-neutral request on Afrikaans wikipedia's discussion forum (google translations and own emphases below).
Another user then replies on 7 February: "I will ask a member of the WikimediaZA board to look into it."
My, user:JMK's, contribution to the discussion was that it must not be published in main space, and user:Mieliestronk returns to the Afrikaans forum on 27 March with various non-neutral and disparaging remarks:
The article is published in main space two days later, 29 March. A user asks him to accept good faith, and he replies on 29 March:
Following my attention to this article, user:Mieliestronk visits my talk page on 2 May in what appears like an attempt at stealth canvassing:
I may add that on the Afrikaans article the careers of de Beer's children are also included, without references, but user:Mieliestronk seems to suggest that I, user:JMK, is more closely acquainted with the subject. Then in full view above, user:Mieliestronk calls upon a user to override my contributions.
JMK ( talk) 14:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
I thought that perhaps the two SACOMM references would not lead back to the subject again, and might substantiate the statements made, but they do lead back to the subject, and the first, co-written by the subject(!), does not substantiate the claim that he was co-founder of SACOMM in 1977, the year when he demonstrably joined the Broederbond. It states that SACOMM was founded in 1977, but that the founding documents and constitution were lost. SACOMM can show minutes of conventions since 2014 however, a 37 year gap. One also cannot deduce who the subject's SACOMM co-founders were. Was it the organizer and chairman of the 1977 RAU conference, de Koning (likely not a Broeder), or was it Gavin Stewart of Rhodes who drew up the now lost constitution with the subject's assistance, or was it the subject's close ally HP Fourie? If the subject was a 1977 co-founder, it is particularly strange that neither he or HP Fourie (member for life) can remember where that first conference of 1978 was held, or what the conference theme was. Neither can HP Fourie, or the subject, remember whether Fourie was chairman at the 1979 conference, or whether Fourie was reelected there, or where it took place, or what the theme was. At the 1980 and 1981 conferences, HP appears on the scene, and keynote speakers include broeder Piet Koornhof, Louis le Grange, etc. The subject claims that SACOMM is "the official organization representing ...", but that would imply some backing or affiliation with higher structures, which they don't mention. It is claimed that SACOMM was founded as a "non-racial academic association", but firstly the 1977 constitution which would prove this is lost, and secondly the subject joined the Broederbond this same year, which advocated apartheid. Yes, the subject, his ally HP, and the Tomaselli couple appear to be members for life. JMK ( talk) 15:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
@ JMK:'s insinuation of my "attempt at stealth canvassing" while I was just trying to be a civilised Afrikaner as I was brought up to be, is the last straw. I was just trying to come to the bottom of what I perceived as a personal hostility towards the "Broederbonder". My brain could not think otherwise. If my perception was totally wrong and totally uncalled for, I am sorry. Being as uninformed as I am, I needed some clarification, be it outside the Wikipedia altogether if need be. One does not always want to discuss such mattters on an open forum when speaking about another person, in fact it would be very unfair towards any such third party. That was all really. And if there is a "closed forum" for discussing problems somewhere on Wikipedia, I did not know it existed and still would not know were to find it. I honestly can't remember reading something in this regard, but if I did, I must have misunderstood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mieliestronk ( talk • contribs) 21:12, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
My regte naam is G (Ollie) Olwagen. Ek en my bruid van baie jare sit ingeperk in 'n aftreeoord en weet as die virus ons pik, is ons kanse maar baie skraal. Hoe ek betrokke geraak het by hierdie relletjie, weet ek nie. Ekskuus maar net weer aan JMK as ek die gemoedere opgejaag het waar dit kon gebly het. En nee, ek bak nie nou valse mooi broodjies nie en soek nie simpatie met 'n heuning-om-die-mond-smeerdery nie. Ons is almal maar net menslik en begeer eintlik net vrede. Mieliestronk ( talk) 19:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
In fact I think now is the time for me to retire from writing any article of any forum (English or Afrikaans) on Wikipedia ever again, and anyone may quote me on that. I shall continue to edit Afrikaans articles occasionally a little bit to improve style, facts and language, but that is as far as my participation should go. In that way one does not hurt or get hurt, which is all that matters in the long run.
Mieliestronk (
talk) 20:24, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@
Greenman: or who ever could help ☺
Did not think I would ever return to comment, but the good professor has died. His death was widely reported in the Afrikaans press and internet, comments stating, among other accolades, that he was the "doyen of Afrikaans journalism":
https://maroelamedia.co.za/nuus/sa---nuus/doyen-van-joernalistiek-arrie-de-beer-sterf/ . I tried to change the article to reflect his death, but edit was reverted by someone. --
Mieliestronk (
talk) 04:37, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Reverter stated that "Death requires a WP:RS". I do not know what that means. More proof that Arnold de Beer has died is to be found here: https://www.litnet.co.za/in-memoriam-arnold-s-de-beer/ and here: https://www.netwerk24.com/netwerk24/nuus/aktueel/professor-in-joernalistiek-se-dood-laat-groot-leemte-20211021 and here: https://www.netwerk24.com/netwerk24/nuus/mense/prof-arrie-was-n-pionier-van-joernalistiek-20211021 -- Mieliestronk ( talk) 04:59, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I am still busy writing the article on the professor, but someone just could not wait to jump upon one with their tags of multiple issues or whatever. Could you not give one some breathing space? Eeeesh, to whom could I report such annoying eagerness? This article is not a self publicaton to begin with. My surname is not De Beer and am busy with an article about an important journalism academic on the South African scene. I have never met the person personally, only talked on Facebook and e-mail. More links to sources are forthcoming. Mieliestronk ( talk) 21:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC) (Ollie Olwagen from South Africa, where we have enough troubles with everything from state corruption up to covid, and really do not need more teeny irritations such as these even if they seem small to some. Have a nice day, Mamushir.)
User:Mieliestronk admits twice that he was in contact with the subject. He further cites himself as the creator of the subject's photo, and possibly got the birth date and place from the subject himself. On the Afrikaans geselshoekie he writes: "I myself decided to write about him and informed him, as our emails will show," as above, "only talked on Facebook and e-mail". JMK ( talk) 13:01, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
JMK ( talk) 15:33, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Just to explain some of one's intentions: I've had previous experiences regarding the deep entanglement one could get onself into just trying to post a mere snapshot to Wikipedia. So I wrote to the subject: Please bequeath, bestow, award and hand over (!) your copyright to me and make me the owner of your picture, then there skould be no problem, as far as I understand South African law. And he said: Ok, proceed. I can show our emails in this regard to whom it may concern. All above board and having no strings whatsoever attached.
But, yes: If one should "know" a person, does that mean one could not write about him on her on Wikipedia? How many miriads of contributors of articles must have "known" their subject at least in some way? I virtually came to "know" the person when telling him on Facebook/Messenger I needed to write about him. I did not know of any other way I could approach the article save for making contact with the person himself in the first place. What else could I have done? I was just trying to get articles written on Afrikaans journalists in various fields in South Africa in the past years. And he was the only Afrikaans journalist I could think of whose academic contributions outshine even his contributions to newspapers or periodicals themselves. Nothing more. I have never met the subject in person, and that is a fact I could swear by. Why should I have any other intention of furthering his cause than the journalistic angle? I am sure that is what is meant by the Wikipedia spirit of good faith. is it not?
Furthermore about the Broederbond: JMK has his own opinion about the matter which seems to be politically driven, I really don't know. And implying that our respected Academy of the Afrikaans Language have been racist in all their decades of existence, hurts an Afrikaner like me more than I think he could ever imagine. All the many prizes won by most respected writers of all colours and creeds in Afrikaans, Adam Small et al, all of them were awarded by a dirty racist organization? Repeat this accusation on a wider platform and see what the reaction would be. But so be it if somebody believes so. I have no interest other than stating the facts.
@ Greenman:, one would very much like to hear your opinion, please. Asseblief tog. Ek is 'n ou man wat reeds voor die Tweede Wêreldoorlog gebore is. Waarom ek in elk geval soveel moeite doen om die verhaal van die Afrikaanse joernalistiek op 'n wêreldforum vasgelê te probeer kry, kan ek maar net toeskryf aan my liefde vir my moedertaal wat miskien ook maar net gedoem is om spoedig uit te sterf in die huidige wêreldbestel. Kortom, is daar 'n manier om die nuwe besware verwyder te kry wat nou weer bo-aan die artikel verskyn wat jy self goedgekeur het? Daar kan tog nie 'n ewige gestry oor artikels wees nie, want op die ou end is niemand tevrede met enige ander persoon se bydraes nie. Mieliestronk ( talk) 12:29, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
— Note: An editor has expressed a concern that editors have been
canvassed to this discussion.
Editors may like to take note of the canvassing employed to publish this article in main space and to dissuade subsequent scrutiny. On 7 February 2021 user:Mieliestronk posts the following non-neutral request on Afrikaans wikipedia's discussion forum (google translations and own emphases below).
Another user then replies on 7 February: "I will ask a member of the WikimediaZA board to look into it."
My, user:JMK's, contribution to the discussion was that it must not be published in main space, and user:Mieliestronk returns to the Afrikaans forum on 27 March with various non-neutral and disparaging remarks:
The article is published in main space two days later, 29 March. A user asks him to accept good faith, and he replies on 29 March:
Following my attention to this article, user:Mieliestronk visits my talk page on 2 May in what appears like an attempt at stealth canvassing:
I may add that on the Afrikaans article the careers of de Beer's children are also included, without references, but user:Mieliestronk seems to suggest that I, user:JMK, is more closely acquainted with the subject. Then in full view above, user:Mieliestronk calls upon a user to override my contributions.
JMK ( talk) 14:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
I thought that perhaps the two SACOMM references would not lead back to the subject again, and might substantiate the statements made, but they do lead back to the subject, and the first, co-written by the subject(!), does not substantiate the claim that he was co-founder of SACOMM in 1977, the year when he demonstrably joined the Broederbond. It states that SACOMM was founded in 1977, but that the founding documents and constitution were lost. SACOMM can show minutes of conventions since 2014 however, a 37 year gap. One also cannot deduce who the subject's SACOMM co-founders were. Was it the organizer and chairman of the 1977 RAU conference, de Koning (likely not a Broeder), or was it Gavin Stewart of Rhodes who drew up the now lost constitution with the subject's assistance, or was it the subject's close ally HP Fourie? If the subject was a 1977 co-founder, it is particularly strange that neither he or HP Fourie (member for life) can remember where that first conference of 1978 was held, or what the conference theme was. Neither can HP Fourie, or the subject, remember whether Fourie was chairman at the 1979 conference, or whether Fourie was reelected there, or where it took place, or what the theme was. At the 1980 and 1981 conferences, HP appears on the scene, and keynote speakers include broeder Piet Koornhof, Louis le Grange, etc. The subject claims that SACOMM is "the official organization representing ...", but that would imply some backing or affiliation with higher structures, which they don't mention. It is claimed that SACOMM was founded as a "non-racial academic association", but firstly the 1977 constitution which would prove this is lost, and secondly the subject joined the Broederbond this same year, which advocated apartheid. Yes, the subject, his ally HP, and the Tomaselli couple appear to be members for life. JMK ( talk) 15:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
@ JMK:'s insinuation of my "attempt at stealth canvassing" while I was just trying to be a civilised Afrikaner as I was brought up to be, is the last straw. I was just trying to come to the bottom of what I perceived as a personal hostility towards the "Broederbonder". My brain could not think otherwise. If my perception was totally wrong and totally uncalled for, I am sorry. Being as uninformed as I am, I needed some clarification, be it outside the Wikipedia altogether if need be. One does not always want to discuss such mattters on an open forum when speaking about another person, in fact it would be very unfair towards any such third party. That was all really. And if there is a "closed forum" for discussing problems somewhere on Wikipedia, I did not know it existed and still would not know were to find it. I honestly can't remember reading something in this regard, but if I did, I must have misunderstood. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mieliestronk ( talk • contribs) 21:12, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
My regte naam is G (Ollie) Olwagen. Ek en my bruid van baie jare sit ingeperk in 'n aftreeoord en weet as die virus ons pik, is ons kanse maar baie skraal. Hoe ek betrokke geraak het by hierdie relletjie, weet ek nie. Ekskuus maar net weer aan JMK as ek die gemoedere opgejaag het waar dit kon gebly het. En nee, ek bak nie nou valse mooi broodjies nie en soek nie simpatie met 'n heuning-om-die-mond-smeerdery nie. Ons is almal maar net menslik en begeer eintlik net vrede. Mieliestronk ( talk) 19:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
In fact I think now is the time for me to retire from writing any article of any forum (English or Afrikaans) on Wikipedia ever again, and anyone may quote me on that. I shall continue to edit Afrikaans articles occasionally a little bit to improve style, facts and language, but that is as far as my participation should go. In that way one does not hurt or get hurt, which is all that matters in the long run.
Mieliestronk (
talk) 20:24, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
@
Greenman: or who ever could help ☺
Did not think I would ever return to comment, but the good professor has died. His death was widely reported in the Afrikaans press and internet, comments stating, among other accolades, that he was the "doyen of Afrikaans journalism":
https://maroelamedia.co.za/nuus/sa---nuus/doyen-van-joernalistiek-arrie-de-beer-sterf/ . I tried to change the article to reflect his death, but edit was reverted by someone. --
Mieliestronk (
talk) 04:37, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
Reverter stated that "Death requires a WP:RS". I do not know what that means. More proof that Arnold de Beer has died is to be found here: https://www.litnet.co.za/in-memoriam-arnold-s-de-beer/ and here: https://www.netwerk24.com/netwerk24/nuus/aktueel/professor-in-joernalistiek-se-dood-laat-groot-leemte-20211021 and here: https://www.netwerk24.com/netwerk24/nuus/mense/prof-arrie-was-n-pionier-van-joernalistiek-20211021 -- Mieliestronk ( talk) 04:59, 7 December 2021 (UTC)