Talk:Nelson Mandela/Archive 4

message: This article is in need of reorganization. 
Obadiaha 18:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree... Its certainly not high on the list of imortant articles that are disorganized. And much better than a month ago anyway. MadMaxDog 07:54, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disorganized 

message: I've reworked and removed quite a few critical comments added recently by . I did them in separate submissions so that I could leave fairly detailed comments on each change I made.  I don't intend to remove criticism of Mandela from this article, but these submissions "smelt" bad. You shouldn't be able to identify individual sentences and paragraphs in an article as being written by a "pro" or "anti" editor. 
Among the many problems with this contribution were:
* an uncited claim that Mandela encouraged genocide
:: Perhaps this can help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKiePbTcAfY
* several weasel words like "supporters claim that"
* use of the word "terrorism" twice. (Mandela was convicted of sabotage, not terrorism, so the term in one case was factually incorrect. Terrorism in any case is a loaded term which is generally avoided on Wikipedia). 
Zaian 22:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Support your edits, Zaian. Though I feel that if someone opposed to this articles current balance were to find a notable quote calling Mandela a 'terrorist' (probably not that hard), then it could well be retained. He was not always seen as the saint he is generally considered nowadays, not in the cold-war and apartheid atmospheres... MadMaxDog 07:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I'm sure there are Reagen/Thatcher/Botha quotes labelling Mandela as a terrorist, or even maybe Cheney. On the other side, recently UK commentators have been citing a so-called "Mandela test" to see whether proposed new anti-terror laws are fair - see . The test is that if a proposed law would have classified Mandela as a terrorist for opposing apartheid, the law is too harsh. In other words, Mandela is used as an example of a freedom fighter who was not a terrorist. I suppose the argument is that the anti-apartheid struggle is overwhelmingly seen as justifiable, and the resistance proportionate. Zaian 08:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not calling him one. Though a "Mandela test" will always need hindsight! MadMaxDog 10:56, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem, I didn't think you were.  Zaian 13:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Good point, and a good reference. I've rewritten the sentence in the opening section. (There are two subtle contradictory POV threads running through this article - one is Mandela the non-violent saint, and the other is how reluctant Mandela was to abandon the armed struggle. Neither is accurate. Having both doesn't make the article neutral either!) Zaian 06:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical comments from anonymous editor 

message: Some points in the article that I think need improvement or discussion:
;Political activity
* There is too little information about Mandela's political activities up to his arrest, e.g. his role in the ANC Youth League and his rise within the ANC.
* The description of 1952-1959 seems to be aiming to make a point from a PAC / Africanist perpective about how irrelevant the ANC was becoming and how it was led by whites. Even if this is neutrally presented, it needs to show some relevance to Mandela's life, as this article is not a history of the ANC.
;Arrest and Imprisonment
* The CIA tipping off the police sounds like a fringe theory. - added citations
* There is not enough information on his increasingly symbolic role and the international campaign for his release. - done
* The section on his autobiography is patchy. Far too much about James Gregory. It's also out of chronological order to mention De Klerk and the 1980s/90s here. - done
* Several paragraphs in this section seem to be aiming to make a point about how much in favour of the armed struggle he was. This needs balance/context. e.g. the discussion of his refusal of conditional release could include his response to PW's offer - "A prisoner cannot enter into contracts" - done
;Post apartheid
* There is a 4-year gap here, with nothing about the negotiations period from his release until he assumed the presidency. - done
;Presidency
* The "hated Springboks" is POV. They weren't universally disliked. - suppose it's OK, in the context of black South African views under apartheid, to refer to the "previously hated Springboks"
* The invasion of Lesotho should be described neutrally and not presented entirely under "criticism". - done
;Retirement
* The Blood Diamonds discussion is out of proportion. 
;Acclaim
* Perhaps too much emphasis on Canada.
; Movies and music
* This could be removed to a separate page, Nelson Mandela in popular culture or similar title, to discourage trivia on this page. - expanded, rewrote as prose instead of list. OK to leave it as its own section
* Remove Wadham College reference to List of awards and honours bestowed on Nelson Mandela - done
* Remove reference to Queen song - is it important, and does it have anything to do with Mandela? - done
;Trivia
* This section is a dumping ground. Bulleted lists are bad style in an article, and also encourage editors to add facts into a list without context rather than incorporate them into the article properly. - moved several list items into the article text
* The Olympics quote seems out of proportion. Mandela has said quotable things about lots of organisations. - moved into different section of article. Withdraw my comment based on other editor believing that the quote deserves to be here
Zaian 20:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Will have a look at condensing the Blood Diamond thing later on (I added it) or you can do it, Zaian. I somewhat disagree with your opinions on style questions of bulleted lists (yes, they do need more maintenance, but...) and the Olympics quotation (very good quote from a style and symbolism point of view). Otherwise, valid points. MadMaxDog 06:32, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More areas for improvement 

message: The section on the Ismail Ayob saga needs major cleaning up. It is significant because it shows the tensions surrounding the ongoing commercialisation and exploitation of Mandela's image (the Blood Diamond controversy could perhaps be another example of this). I do actually remember the roadshows undertaken by Mandela's friends, and this was a very big political issue at the time, before it was mysteriously dropped. Some of the material can probably be safely moved to the Ismail Ayob article though. 
For what it's worth, inside information I have gleaned (even though that means nothing on Wikipedia) does tend to lean towards the account given by Zayd-just adding this because Zayd's contributions shouldn't be wiped out without careful consideration of the sources cited.Park3r 23:11, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A balanced account is important, and I'm glad Zayd is now taking a constructive approach by editing this article, although as it stands, it takes up too much space compared to sections on other incidents in Mandela's life.  Given that Ismail Ayob's son is Zayd Ayob (and also his legal partner), it would also  be useful if  would declare whether or not he is Zayd Ayob. Zaian 06:15, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ismail Ayob

message: Was he the 11th president of SA or the 1st?199.44.20.13 22:02, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As the opening sentence says, he was the first president elected in fully-representative democratic elections. According to the infobox, apparently there were 10 previous presidents (I didn't count them), but before Mandela the vote was restricted to whites only, so they would not have qualified as democratically elected in any normal use of the term. Zaian 20:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Prior to the "reformed apartheid" constitution adopted in 1983 (in referenda that excluded Africans) the state presidents were formal heads of state with executive power held by a prime minister in a more-or-less Westminster style parliament.  Since the king or queen of England was the head of state, acting through a high commissioner (like other British Dominions) prior to the declaration of S.A. as a Republic in 1960, the number ten for presidents seems high to me.  Prior to Mandela there were two executive presidents:  P. W. Both and F. W. de Klerk.  The arguments that their elections were in any meaningful sense democratic is nonsense unless one wants to argue that those excluded from the franchise were not part of the people of South Africa.  This of course is the situation "grand apartheid" aimed to create in a formal way, by removing Africans from political citizenship in South Africa and assigning it to phony countries, the bantustans.  But note that under S.A.'s own law, and the legal program of the National Party ("Promotion of Bantu Self-Government Act" & sequelae), the legal fact of African citizenship was recognized and had to be changed.  Though they were hard to get, when Africans and other Blacks travelled overseas, they had S.A. passports.  Prior to the 1994-96 constitutional transition, South Africa was never democratic.  Rather it was a racialized electoral oligarchy.  Elections don't make democracy.  The Holy Roman Emperors used to be elected.  The electorate was just very small, not the whole people.  it wasn't the whole people in S.A. prior to 1994 either, only a smallish minority. Chris Lowe 06:54, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  ? 

message: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKiePbTcAfY At least he is clenching his fist in this Video. This demonstrates some agreement with the statement of the song. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.2.124.251 (talk) 12:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: AmaBhulu doesn't mean "whites" in isiXhosa, as the translation says, it means Boers or Afrikaners -- in some ways that might be seen to strengthen the case for a more specific ethnic animosity of the sort that could contribute to genocide, of course, but it speaks something to reliability of the commentary.  Umkhonto we Sizwe (Spear of the Nation, a.k.a. MK) was the ANC army.  This was an army song.  If the U.S. or British army had songs in World War I or World War II that involved a sentiment of "killing the Germans" it would not have been an advocacy of genocide, but a statement of who the enemy was.  Notice the white guy standing to Mandela's left (right of M. from viewer's side).  That is Ronnie Kasrils, who was a key commander of MK.  Notice other white ANCer's singing too.  One doesn't find Hitler with Jewish generals, or the Serbs or Croats with Bosnian ones.  The key document of the modern ANC has been the Freedom Charter of 1955.  The Charter says "South Africa belongs to all who live there."  This position was rejected by the Pan-Africanist nationalists who broke away in 1957 to form the Pan-Africanist Congress precisely because they disagreed that South Africa belonged in part to whites.  Rather they said it belonged to "Sons of the Soil" (Africans and Coloureds) and treated both whites and Indians as alien unless they proved a full commitment to Africa.  Under Mandela's presidency, the ANC pursued nothing at all like a genocidal policy.  On the contrary, the ANC itself placed whites in high office, backtracked (some argue betrayed) on redistributive promises under a Reconstruction and Development Programme in favor of a policy called GEAR that was much more in line with what big business and the World Bank/IMF were demanding for macro-economic policy, formed governments of national unity including the New National Party (many party representing Afrikaners at the time) and protected the civil service jobs of existing white government employees (racially discriminatory patronage in favor of whites and especially Afrikaners was a key element of National Party success in the previous 40-odd years).  I believe that this film may come from a time before the 1994 elections when there was a massacre of demonstrators against the Ciskei bantustan, or possibly at a commemoration of the massacre of peaceful demonstrator at Sharpeville in 1960, the event which more than other swung the debate within the ANC against non-violent direct action over to armed struggle.  
Chris Lowe 07:37, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does Mandela Advocates Genocide? 

message: Under TRIVIA...
"He speaks fluent Afrikaans, a language disliked by many black people because of its roots in colonialism."
I fail to see how Afrikaans has its roots in colonialism, since Wikipedia itself refers to colonialism as "the extension of a nation's sovereignty over territory beyond its borders", etc etc. Could someone provide an example of Afrikaans-based colonialism?
Also, that many black people dislike the language is a bit of a generalisation, and indeed somewhat conflicting if you are using the ANC's current race classification system, under which the term 'blacks' includes 'coloureds', the majority of whom speak the language as their mother tongue and hold no real animosity towards it. You could then replace 'black people' with 'African people' (to use the ANC's own terminology), but for me this is, in a universal context, more of a geographical description than anything else. Even then you would require a bunch of citations.
Therefore, I am shortening things to "He speaks fluent Afrikaans", until someone else comes up with something better.
FlyBang 12:40, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The sentence used to say "a language once hated by black people because of its association with Apartheid." At some point it was changed to say colonialism, which is inaccurate. Zaian 12:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fluent Afrikaans

message: Mandela has some Bushman appearance but seems to speak no
Bushman language. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.145.48.55 (talk) 16:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No speaking 

message: There are now three references in the article to a connection between the CIA and Mandela's arrest. However, I don't think any of them is a particularly reliable source. I removed  because it's only an interview with a film director.  is the allegation itself, so it's not a neutral source.  is better as it refers to specific 1990 news reports in the 1990 South African Sunday Times and Atlanta Journal-Constitution. There's a New York Times article at  but it's subscription only. Does anyone know more about this?  How reliable are the claims from the people involved? Zaian 23:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: CIA connection in Mandela's arrest

message: I am nominating this article as a Good Article candidate. It previously failed to reach this status (November 2006) on the grounds that it had only five references, which is no longer the case. I feel the article is very much improved and we should aim to take it as far as Featured Article status. This is an important article and it will benefit hugely from the external reviews which are part of this process. Zaian 11:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks - bubble not burst, as most of those are mostly fairly easy to address (I've reworked the article to remove the Trivia section already). Could you highlight anything else that needs to be addressed? Zaian 19:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: For one... could you give the others, so that there's a target to work towards? And could you give an example of a paragraph needing improvement?  I'd like to know if the article close to GA level, or far from it, and preferably a bulleted list of comments. IMO, such a brief review doesn't do justice to the article or the GA nomination process. Do we only get one reviewer? Zaian 06:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For example, in the allegations section, the last two paragraphs are 2 sentences long. Generally, if the paragraphs are going to be that short they need to be really good, which is hard to do. For general english writing practices, try to keep paragraphs at least 4 sentences long. They don't need to be extremely long, because too long of paragraphs can be hard to read; it's a judgement call on the length, but you don't want 1 sentence paragraphs all over the article.   BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 13:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, a lot of your subsections are extremely small, which could constitue "weak" sections of the article. For example, I don't see why you can't put "Teriary education" under "schooling". It's all part of his educational advancement, and it's only a couple lines of information. Things like that can be helpful to the article.   BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 13:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the clarifications and suggestions. I have combined a number of shorter paragraphs, and combined sections in a few places, and also acted on all of the original comments from Alientraveller. Is it getting closer to the GA mark now? Zaian 13:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good Article candidate

message: Sorry to burst your bubble but the article suffers from trivia, unformated citations, a section requiring expansion and a trivia list. Alientraveller 19:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks - bubble not burst, as most of those are mostly fairly easy to address (I've reworked the article to remove the Trivia section already). Could you highlight anything else that needs to be addressed? Zaian 19:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

text: For one... could you give the others, so that there's a target to work towards? And could you give an example of a paragraph needing improvement?  I'd like to know if the article close to GA level, or far from it, and preferably a bulleted list of comments. IMO, such a brief review doesn't do justice to the article or the GA nomination process. Do we only get one reviewer? Zaian 06:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: For example, in the allegations section, the last two paragraphs are 2 sentences long. Generally, if the paragraphs are going to be that short they need to be really good, which is hard to do. For general english writing practices, try to keep paragraphs at least 4 sentences long. They don't need to be extremely long, because too long of paragraphs can be hard to read; it's a judgement call on the length, but you don't want 1 sentence paragraphs all over the article.   BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 13:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, a lot of your subsections are extremely small, which could constitue "weak" sections of the article. For example, I don't see why you can't put "Teriary education" under "schooling". It's all part of his educational advancement, and it's only a couple lines of information. Things like that can be helpful to the article.   BIGNOLE   (Contact me) 13:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the clarifications and suggestions. I have combined a number of shorter paragraphs, and combined sections in a few places, and also acted on all of the original comments from Alientraveller. Is it getting closer to the GA mark now? Zaian 13:29, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Failed GA

message: It should be noted that Mandela was parodied in a sketch by Dave Chapelle on the Chapelle Show. The sketch was about Mandela being a boot camp instructor brought to the Sally Jesse Raphael show to scare unruly teenagers. (Ghostexorcist 19:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chapelle Show 

message: Wouldn't it be more appropriate to change the SA flag in the infobox to the one in use at the time of his birth?   (South Africa Red Ensign)  It appears to me that most infoboxes have the flag according to the birthdate. KeNNy 19:50, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox flag 

message: :GA review (see here for criteria)
#It is reasonably well written.
#:a (prose):  b (MoS): 
#It is factually accurate and verifiable.
#:a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
#It is broad in its coverage.
#:a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
#It follows the neutral point of view policy.
#:a (fair representation):  b (all significant views): 
#It is stable.
#:
#It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
#:a (tagged and captioned):  b (lack of images does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales): 
#Overall: 
#:a Pass/Fail: 
In the section "Guerrilla activities" it says "A few decades later, MK did indeed wage a guerrilla war against the regime, especially during the 1980s, in which many civilians were killed." My question is: "Is Mandela still in-charged of MK organization when this happened?" If not then that sentence should be removed because it's not related to him. The information in "Arrest and Rivonia trial" can be moved into Rivonia Trial article itself.
Another thing, is the section "Invasion of Lesotho" and "Lockerbie trial" necessary in his article? It's better to put this info to somewhere else or create a sub-article. 
I'm not sure about the copyright of :Image:Young Mandela.jpg. Please fix the sections mentioned above to meet the GA criteria. OhanaUnitedTalk page 16:39, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Image issue is done by Ezeu. Citations, however, seems to be good in my opinion. They are taken from reputable news agencies. I'll see what I can do on the coverage. OhanaUnitedTalk page 06:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Image issue is done by Ezeu .. yadiyada .. however" leaves a faint lingering feeling of having been accused of something. An elaborate fairuser rationale for :Image:Young Mandela.jpg was added after the above GA review. Not a problem I hope? --Ezeu 00:59, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Review 

message: The Guardian has a recording of Mandela's speech at the opening of his trial in 1964. http://www.guardian.co.uk/greatspeeches/mandela/0,,2060099,00.html Anyone know the copyright status of the recording? Maybe we can add an OGG media file to Wikipedia. --Dbolton 23:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The speech is provided by the National Archives of South Africa. --Ezeu 04:47, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mandela on the dock (speech) 

message: Could we get a quote from Mandela regarding his atheism? The user who posted it said he was a "professed atheist". 74.105.48.21 13:09, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Remove it. Seems like nonsense. --Ezeu 00:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Atheist?

message: Wasn't Mandela let out of jail a year early? Cloudbreath9 23:18, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mandela was in jail continuously from some point in mid- or late-1962 until February 1990, so, 27 or 28 years.  The 26 year figure generally refers to the period after his conviction, most of which he spent on Robben Island.  In the very last period of his imprisonment, which was also a period in which he and other major prisoners were negotiating with the de Klerk government, they were moved to a more comfortable prison on the mainland convenient to the executive capital of Pretoria (I believe, though I could be wrong & it may have been near Cape Town).  He wasn't let out "a year early" -- he was sentenced to life. Chris Lowe 08:15, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  26 years instead of 27? 

message: Please check the history. There's been severe vandalism on this page. I recommend semi-protection for some time Oskilian 22:31, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An alternative would be to permanently block the anon IPs who are doing the vandalising. We could start with this nasty piece of work: 218.185.72.226.Phase4 23:00, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protection required? 

message: I have edited the controversial sentence in the guerrilla section (see above under debate over SA criminals category, and again under GA review) about later guerrilla warfare killing many civilians to point out that more civilians were killed by state security forces and vigilante groups they supported.  At first I was inclined to change many to "some", but looking at the WP definition of civilian it appears that police count as civilians for these purposes.
Another ambiguity here is that guerrilla war here appears to refer to the activities of Mkhonto we Sizwe.  Many of the killings committed by pro-ANC persons of "collaborators" (including but not restricted to police), e.g. the infamous horrific "necklacings" with burning tires, were done by members of UDF or Mass Democratic Movement organizations, i.e. other civilians, not by MK-trained guerrillas.  However, UDF/MDM actions were claimed by MK as part of the strategy of "making the townships ungovernable," so perhaps they should be regarded as part of the guerrilla war.  Assuming that is what the current language implies in arriving at the statement that "many" civilians were killed by the ANC's guerrilla warfare is why I added the part about vigilantes, who were the equivalent sort of person to UDF/MDM members on the pro-government side.  
OhanaUnited above questions whether this sentence should be here at all if Mandela was no longer directing guerrilla activities.  He certainly was not.  Decisions concerning shifts to wider guerrilla tactics were made by the collective exiled ANC leadership headed by Oliver Tambo.  The earliest, taken at Magorogoro in Tanzania in 1969, actually was to participate in guerrilla campaigns against Ian Smith's Southern Rhodesia.  Guerrilla struggles in South Africa itself only became practical after the Portuguese and Mozambiquan revolutions in 1973/74.  
On the other hand, Mandela never ceased to support the armed struggle.  P. W. Botha offered to release him if he would renounce the use of violence as a strategy and tactic as early as 1986, but Mandela refused to do so.  Botha made this offer largely because he feared the consequences should Mandela die in prison; Mandela's refusal likewise was based on calculations of negotiating leverage.  
In light of the question posed above by OhanaUnited, and less dramatically by Loadmaster, it may be that an edit is in order along the lines of "After his imprisonment, Mandela no longer directed the ANC's guerrilla warfare, but he never wavered from his support for armed struggle as a necessary component of ANC strategy, even as it evolved into wider and more violent forms in the 1970s and 1980s."  Possibly also mention of Botha's offer and Mandela's refusal.  
Chris Lowe 08:40, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Guerrilla section