This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
44 Parachute Brigade (South Africa) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
An image used in this article, File:ArmyNine.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:ArmyNine.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 22:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC) |
I suggest splitting out the info about 1 Parachute Battalion and creating its own page. Your thoughts? Gbawden ( talk) 09:29, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
I just noticed 44 Pathfinder Platoon, an almost unsourced lengthy article about a small sub-unit of this brigade. I suggest merging it with this article - there isn't that much sourced content to merge in the first place. Huon ( talk) 16:59, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Dear Rodger, I am open to amending the split as you recommend and will commence with this in the next day or two. The reason this was split is because another Admin (GBowden) noted that 44 Parachute Brigade Wiki page was two long and hence 1 Parachute Battalion, 18 Light Regiment was split from the main 44 Parachute Brigade article. 44 Pathfinder Platoon also has sizable content and I have subsequently also commenced splitting this off. I will look at the other site references you make note of and re-hash the content according to suggested guidelines. I put the original 44 Parachute Brigade page together and as you can see from the numerous references many contributed content and there were many different styles that were contributed. Getting this all to a standard will take time but it will be done. For many months no one noticed or took interest in 44 Parachute Brigade beside admins who ripped certain pics off. I am open to working with the various admins and also seek guidance on putting content up as I have tons of pics members from the Brigade have contributed. Looking forward to with the admins and getting assistance from all Smikect 04:36, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Roger, thanks I'll take a look at the link 91.72.134.108 ( talk) 14:38, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Large sections of the current article are unsourced. When sources are provided, they are mostly biased. The terms used to describe the operations of the Brigade are euphemistic and affirmative of the questionable conduct of the apartheid era security forces. Let's not ignore the fact that the United Nations Security Council resolution 264 condemned the continued presence of South African (para-)military forces on Namibian soil.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 428, which condemned the illegal incursions of South African troops into Angolan territory and the atrocious attacks on refugee camps, also has to be taken into consideration.
In it's current state the article reads like a glorification of apartheid military force and denialism of the atrocious track record of the apartheid era security force. There is no balance and no neutrality present.
To conclude: the article needs some serious re-editing to meet Wikipedia's editorial standards. CraigoGiarco ( talk) 16:08, 24 November 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
44 Parachute Brigade (South Africa) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
An image used in this article, File:ArmyNine.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:ArmyNine.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 22:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC) |
I suggest splitting out the info about 1 Parachute Battalion and creating its own page. Your thoughts? Gbawden ( talk) 09:29, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
I just noticed 44 Pathfinder Platoon, an almost unsourced lengthy article about a small sub-unit of this brigade. I suggest merging it with this article - there isn't that much sourced content to merge in the first place. Huon ( talk) 16:59, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Dear Rodger, I am open to amending the split as you recommend and will commence with this in the next day or two. The reason this was split is because another Admin (GBowden) noted that 44 Parachute Brigade Wiki page was two long and hence 1 Parachute Battalion, 18 Light Regiment was split from the main 44 Parachute Brigade article. 44 Pathfinder Platoon also has sizable content and I have subsequently also commenced splitting this off. I will look at the other site references you make note of and re-hash the content according to suggested guidelines. I put the original 44 Parachute Brigade page together and as you can see from the numerous references many contributed content and there were many different styles that were contributed. Getting this all to a standard will take time but it will be done. For many months no one noticed or took interest in 44 Parachute Brigade beside admins who ripped certain pics off. I am open to working with the various admins and also seek guidance on putting content up as I have tons of pics members from the Brigade have contributed. Looking forward to with the admins and getting assistance from all Smikect 04:36, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Roger, thanks I'll take a look at the link 91.72.134.108 ( talk) 14:38, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Large sections of the current article are unsourced. When sources are provided, they are mostly biased. The terms used to describe the operations of the Brigade are euphemistic and affirmative of the questionable conduct of the apartheid era security forces. Let's not ignore the fact that the United Nations Security Council resolution 264 condemned the continued presence of South African (para-)military forces on Namibian soil.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 428, which condemned the illegal incursions of South African troops into Angolan territory and the atrocious attacks on refugee camps, also has to be taken into consideration.
In it's current state the article reads like a glorification of apartheid military force and denialism of the atrocious track record of the apartheid era security force. There is no balance and no neutrality present.
To conclude: the article needs some serious re-editing to meet Wikipedia's editorial standards. CraigoGiarco ( talk) 16:08, 24 November 2021 (UTC)