This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is another article of higher quality about the same subject. The "Operation Beanbag" article has POV issues and uses poor sources with a heavy bias. Essentially we are presented a version of events that is very tilted towards the apartheid government's (and it's military forces) narrative, even going as far as using the SADF's internal terminology and name for the "operation".
The events are presented as an ordinary and legitimate military operation, ignoring the violation of International Law by the attackers and the atrocious and racially motivated nature of this incident, which in a purely descriptive manner can only be referred to as a massacre.
The current version of this article presents a gross violation of Wikipedia's WP:NPOV requirements and relies on just two, highly questionable sources - one of whom is a former SADF propagandist and the other a non-academic website glorifying apartheid era special forces operations against anti-apartheid movements.
I suggest a deletion in favour of the other, more qualified article. Alternatively a merger might be a compromise, but it would require a good amount of overhaul.
@ Tim taboi ndiwa and Conlinp: Deletion or Merge? DouwnsG ( talk) 15:40, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
DouwnsG ( talk) 15:39, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
They are a set of articles about what happened from a military history viewpoint and not as to the legitimacy of the cross-border raids, or why politics on both sides necessitated the events. Wars and battles are fought by combatants, the politicians decide the political reasons for event.
Unlike American and European editors, we in Africa don't have hundreds of authors writing article's and books about events in our continent. We have limited primary sources, we battle to find books and articles, internet based sources and digital archiving are limited. We as African editors are constantly battling western bias when creating African articles that met their western standard of notability. Then on top of that issue, we as editors have to battle through and try create articles that balances the opinions of whoever in Africa or the West, who thought they were on the right side of history.
I am in favour of merger of the Matola Raid into Operation Beanbag. You could create two further headers for the political background of events that led to the raid and a reaction to the raid with the current references from the former article.
Alternatively, you could work on an article on ANC Military operation 1960 to 1990. You can then explain why their events should be presented as an ordinary and legitimate military operations, ignoring the violation of International Law by the freedom fighters and the atrocious and racially motivated nature of those incidents, which in a purely descriptive manner can only be referred to as massacres.
Thats tongue-in-cheek. That is why, if you decide to write military history articles, you describe the event and not the political reasoning. You don't decide if you are on the right side history. See the Russo-Ukrainian War as an example of trying to find a balance of who is right or wrong. Very hard.
I could have written an article praising the MK and the ANC effort to bring political legitimacy to South Africa and condemning the violation of Mozambiquan sovereignty or I could have written an article praising South Africa's right to protect it borders and citizens from communist backed terrorists. I instead chose to write an article about an military operation event that was not all together clear from either side and at least remembers the dead's sacrifice of this stupid part of history. Take care. Thanks. Paul . Conlinp ( talk) 12:10, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is another article of higher quality about the same subject. The "Operation Beanbag" article has POV issues and uses poor sources with a heavy bias. Essentially we are presented a version of events that is very tilted towards the apartheid government's (and it's military forces) narrative, even going as far as using the SADF's internal terminology and name for the "operation".
The events are presented as an ordinary and legitimate military operation, ignoring the violation of International Law by the attackers and the atrocious and racially motivated nature of this incident, which in a purely descriptive manner can only be referred to as a massacre.
The current version of this article presents a gross violation of Wikipedia's WP:NPOV requirements and relies on just two, highly questionable sources - one of whom is a former SADF propagandist and the other a non-academic website glorifying apartheid era special forces operations against anti-apartheid movements.
I suggest a deletion in favour of the other, more qualified article. Alternatively a merger might be a compromise, but it would require a good amount of overhaul.
@ Tim taboi ndiwa and Conlinp: Deletion or Merge? DouwnsG ( talk) 15:40, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
DouwnsG ( talk) 15:39, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
They are a set of articles about what happened from a military history viewpoint and not as to the legitimacy of the cross-border raids, or why politics on both sides necessitated the events. Wars and battles are fought by combatants, the politicians decide the political reasons for event.
Unlike American and European editors, we in Africa don't have hundreds of authors writing article's and books about events in our continent. We have limited primary sources, we battle to find books and articles, internet based sources and digital archiving are limited. We as African editors are constantly battling western bias when creating African articles that met their western standard of notability. Then on top of that issue, we as editors have to battle through and try create articles that balances the opinions of whoever in Africa or the West, who thought they were on the right side of history.
I am in favour of merger of the Matola Raid into Operation Beanbag. You could create two further headers for the political background of events that led to the raid and a reaction to the raid with the current references from the former article.
Alternatively, you could work on an article on ANC Military operation 1960 to 1990. You can then explain why their events should be presented as an ordinary and legitimate military operations, ignoring the violation of International Law by the freedom fighters and the atrocious and racially motivated nature of those incidents, which in a purely descriptive manner can only be referred to as massacres.
Thats tongue-in-cheek. That is why, if you decide to write military history articles, you describe the event and not the political reasoning. You don't decide if you are on the right side history. See the Russo-Ukrainian War as an example of trying to find a balance of who is right or wrong. Very hard.
I could have written an article praising the MK and the ANC effort to bring political legitimacy to South Africa and condemning the violation of Mozambiquan sovereignty or I could have written an article praising South Africa's right to protect it borders and citizens from communist backed terrorists. I instead chose to write an article about an military operation event that was not all together clear from either side and at least remembers the dead's sacrifice of this stupid part of history. Take care. Thanks. Paul . Conlinp ( talk) 12:10, 7 July 2022 (UTC)