Talk:List of schools in Namibia

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on List of schools in Namibia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130111203223/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.newera.com.na%2Farticle.php%3Farticleid%3D3353 to http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=3353
*Added  tag to http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=13563
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120927081701/http://www.newera.com.na:80/articles/47900/Oshikoto-Education-Director-disturbed-by-indiscipline-at-schools to http://www.newera.com.na/articles/47900/Oshikoto-Education-Director-disturbed-by-indiscipline-at-schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141119103426/http://www.newera.com.na/articles/46077/January-retires-from-teaching to http://www.newera.com.na/articles/46077/January-retires-from-teaching
*Added  tag to http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=14591
*Added  tag to http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=12649
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120331025622/http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=38100 to http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=38100
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141118105312/http://www.newera.com.na/articles/47814/Mbumba-made-school-patron to http://www.newera.com.na/articles/47814/Mbumba-made-school-patron
*Added  tag to http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=5833
*Added  tag to http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=42607
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on List of schools in Namibia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426041709/http://www.schoolnamibie.nl/dagbreek-school-info.html to http://www.schoolnamibie.nl/dagbreek-school-info.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=13563
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newera.com.na/articles/47900/Oshikoto-Education-Director-disturbed-by-indiscipline-at-schools
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=14591
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=5833
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=42607
*Added  tag to http://www.namibian.com.na/Tsintsabis-youth-want-Namcol-youth-centre/43014
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722234458/http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=caprivi_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=caprivi_schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070921033107/http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=erongo_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=erongo_schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070921033537/http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=omusati_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=omusati_schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070114052056/http://www.africaalmanac.com/top20highschools.html to http://www.africaalmanac.com/top20highschools.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:25, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on List of schools in Namibia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722234446/http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=khomas_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=khomas_schools
*Added  tag to http://www.buergersinnstiftung.de/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=46&Itemid=62
*Added archive https://archive.is/20130221130445/http://www.namibian.com.na/news-articles/national/full-story/archive/2013/january/article/st-boniface-the-story-behind-the-success/ to http://www.namibian.com.na/news-articles/national/full-story/archive/2013/january/article/st-boniface-the-story-behind-the-success/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722234446/http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=khomas_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=khomas_schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722234451/http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=ohangwena_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=ohangwena_schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722234442/http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=oshikoto_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=oshikoto_schools
*Added  tag to http://www.namibiaproperty.com/info.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.namibia-botschaft.de/html_namibia/bilder/Schulen.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:11, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on List of schools in Namibia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120331184946/http://www.dev.azafrica.com/arc/data/okavango_schools.php to http://www.dev.azafrica.com/arc/data/okavango_schools.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140108123122/http://www.dev.azafrica.com/arc/data/ohangwena_schools.php to http://www.dev.azafrica.com/arc/data/ohangwena_schools.php
*Added  tag to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=hardap_schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071015215653/http://arc.org.na/home.php?pn=karas_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=karas_schools
*Added  tag to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=okavango_schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070921032757/http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=kunene_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=kunene_schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070921033443/http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=omaheke_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=omaheke_schools
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110722234218/http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=oshana_schools to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=oshana_schools
*Added  tag to http://www.arc.org.na/home.php?pn=otjozondjupa_schools
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: New Era is one of four daily newspapers. It is owned by government. How independent the newspaper is from government is disputed. Adamant1, you quote above from the Wikipedia article that ministers phone the newspaper offices with the intention of having newspaper content changed. That is well documented. Whether they succeed or not is unknown, and you omitted the statement Swedish researchers found New Era to be "more critical and fierce" than The Namibian.
Be that as it may, reliability never is total, and neither is independence. Using New Era to document the popularity of SWAPO would not be okay. Using New Era to argue for the effectiveness of governance might, or might not, be okay. The important thing is the context. To remove New Era references in general is unlikely to succeed—if you want to go ahead with an RfC, this is a reasonably free 'pedia, and I can't stop you.
For schools, their size, location and date of establishment, New Era sources in my view are no problem. Even though most schools are governmental and New Era is dependent on government, they have no conceivable advantage by faking the name of a school or its location and basic data. New Era has as much of a 'reputation of fact checking and accuracy' as any other Namibian newspaper, only where they could have a conflict of interest should we be careful. --Pgallert (talk) 06:11, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, it appears that New Era changed their URL or something and that as a result all the links to it are dead now anyway. Who knows what the new URLs are. If there even is any. Which I before I did the RfC, but I wanted to prove a point and set a precedence. That you were arguing for, plus both you and  were reverting me based on, the keeping of dead links just goes to shows how ridiculous and bad faithed this whole thing is. Especially on the part of SportingFlyer. Like it wasn't obvious enough already though. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:32, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not all of the links to it are dead, and the ones that are appear to be from before about 2014 and are available on allafrica.com. I've updated a couple of the URLs. It's very easy to do. SportingFlyer T·C 23:46, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not when someone says you have to either have them approve any edits or they will revert you. Not that I was obligated to replace them anyway though. So, it's cool to say that after the fact. Really, you and Pgallert could have just as easily replaced them before you made a fat issue out of it and really you should have instead of turning the whole thing into one. Nice to know I have your approval now though. Like I needed it. --Adamant1 (talk) 23:57, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you even talking about? No one would revert you for updating URLs from dead links to active ones. The only reason you were reverted is because you were removing chunks of the list en masse, some of those removals were clearly sourced, and other removed schools without direct inline citations were easily verifiable through other links in the article, meaning we had to discuss whether it was proper to winnow the list criteria down. SportingFlyer T·C 00:15, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

text: <squeeze>There absolutely needs to be consensus before removing dead urls. Updating urls, as SportingFlyer has done yesterday, is uncontroversial,  tagging urls as dead is uncontroversial.--Pgallert (talk) 06:28, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wrong. No where does WP:DEADREF say there needs to be consensus before removing a dead reference. You can't use "consensus" as an excuse for article ownership. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:21, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed, but it also says that you should check if it is available elsewhere. And it says: "editors should wait ~24 months after the link is first tagged as dead before declaring that no web archive exists." I read that as 1) first tag it as dead, and 2) if you find a source that has been dead for years, remove the url. Wrong again? --Pgallert (talk) 06:40, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Naaww, your partially correct now. Your original statement wasn't though. That said, it was like 40 dead references. Which is like half of the references in the article. I'm pretty sure the guidelines don't expect someone individually tag 40 references from the same site with the "dead refence" thing and then wait 2 years for them to replaced. As your then going for 2 years with a half dead referenced article. Which isn't really functional. Anyway, you can just go by the "Retrieved" date, which in this case has been like 8 years, and tell from it that the criteria for why we should wait 2 years, due to archiving or whatever after the site dies, has already been met. If they had of died like a month ago sure, wait the two years (although not if it's like half the references on the page though), but the site has already been down for a while from what I could tell. Like I said, your not going to add "dead link" to all 40 refences anyway. Just replace or if you can't delete them and move on at that point. In this case SportingFlyer replaced like two of them, called it quits, and left like 35 without even adding "dead reference" to them, and according to the both of you I can't edit the article or I'll be reverted. So, how is that or "your" way of doing things (leaving dead references without even tagging them as such) helpful at all? If you think my way of doing things isn't good, at least you could have an alternative. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:57, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

text: So, minor update. I asked for clarification on list items just to be sure since originally he only said "articles" and I thought it needed be clarified. He said it was fine to use it to "fill in the gaps." Because there isn't 100% clear examples of them being bias. At least not we have. Which I have zero problem with. Better references should still be used they can be though. Direct government sites should still be removed Also. Plus I'd delete the dead links that can't be replaced. And items that don't have reliable references or blue links should still be gotten rid of. Which can be dealt with in the other discussion since it still hasn't been ironed out. At least we got this out of the way though. --Adamant1 (talk) 02:06, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure what you intend to say here, would you mind to clarify? Thanks, Pgallert (talk) 06:28, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

text: Oh, and finally, would you please have the courtesy to link to the RfC, Adamant1? I have trouble finding it. Thanks, Pgallert (talk) 06:32, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like you found it. What do I need to clarify? --Adamant1 (talk) 06:39, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not an RfC, just a message to a noticeboard. --Pgallert (talk) 05:47, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it wasn't an informal RfC, usually what people say there about references is the thing to follow. Especially if Buidhe is the one saying it. It's weird how so far nothing except your personal opinion is valid though. The guidelines don't count, what people say on a message doesn't count Etc. Etc. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:25, 8 November 2020 (UTC)

text: The simple way to deal with it would have been to point out where I'm wrong in a clear manor without all the personal attacks and other stuff that wasn't neccessary. Both of you failed to do that though. I said I was making the edits, your only rubtle was "do it my way because I say so." Both of you seem more concernced with causing me personal problems then working it though. So, I continue until a clear guideline based arguement has been made to why I shouldn't. I suggested an RfC. Which you both ignored. I cited guidelines. Which you both ignored.I asked you question. Which, again, you both ignored..So...BTW, I'll mention on List of schools in Zimbabwe in particular that Moonythedwarf had removed a bunch of non-notable entries a few days ago. So the conensus there seems to be that they should be removed. I was just helping them out. So, really, you should take it up with them. I find it wierd that taking issue with my edits to the article in particular. When its nothing particular to me. Especially on the talk page of a different article. I guess that's just how you role though. Clearly this a personal thing more then anything else. Adamant1 (talk) 23:46, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

text: BTW, there was also an edit by Jessicapierce to the article a few months ago that removed a lot of non-notable entries to. So, feel free to take it up with them also. Oh, yeah and Ajf773. Who removed a bunch a month before that Etc. Etc. How about [][List of universities in Algeria]]? I didn't edit that one. Lichtt did though and removed a bunch of non-notable item. Weirdly there hasn't a been a peep out of you or anyone else about it. Same for List of schools in Botswana. Where the last editor deleted a non-notable entry. No revert there either. List of schools in Egypt I didn't remove anything from. The editor before my edit, Premeditated Chaos, did though. Where's the outrage and reverts there? Oh, there isn't any. What about List of schools in Ghana? The editor, Dl2000, removed a couple of non-notable entries. Anything from you about? Nope. List of Schools in Kenya, the last edit before mine removed a bunch of non-notable entries. Nothing from you there either. List of schools in Liberia? The last edit, not by me, removed a non-notable entry. Nothing from you there either Etc. Etc. Etc. I don't feel the need to go on. Two things are clear here though 1. It's pretty un-controversial and clearly the established way of doing things to remove non-notable entries from these lists 2. You don't really seem to have a problem with it literally at all. Except for some weird reason when I'm the one doing it. Yet, at the same time you've said this whole is just "good faithed" and your part and that you aren't specifically targeting me or my edits. Adamant1 (talk) 23:53, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Sighhh... again, the issue isn't you removing individual list items, it's removing so many list items that the format of the list changes from "List of schools" (which is a valid list) to "List of notable schools." You're taking a hatchet to these lists without justification. That is the issue. SportingFlyer T·C 12:22, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I told you I'm doing it based on the guideline and the fact that other editors, including admins, remove un-reliably sourced items. That it's "without justification" is purely your own reading of things. As is the "taking a hatchet to the lists" is. That's not the appropriate way to look at removing un-sourced material from articles. It's just normal part of maintenance and there's nothing controversial about it. The point in Wikipedia isn't to "include everything under the sun" no matter how badly or un-sourced it is. At least you created the RfC. Even if you were a little dishonest about it. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:20, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

text: BTW, when I said to do an RfC about it I assumed it would be somewhere else besides the school Wikiproject. Since they have an extremely small audience, tend to lean toward inclusion already, and people are mixed on how authoritative Wikiprojects are anyway. If just you, me, Pgallert, and one other person participates that's not really helpful. There's way more people that have already been editing the lists the way I am and I'm perfectly fine considering their edits the consensus if no better one materializes in the RfC or if it isn't balanced. Hopefully more people participate in the meantime though.
 Adamant1 (talk) 09:22, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: New Era as a source for this list

message: I do hope I'm not creating a new controversy here. It seems we have been discussing with an energy that could have tremendously improved this list instead. The following tasks for this list seem to be entirely uncontroversial, and can be done for now (Please interject if I misread someone or something):
#Removing red links from schools
#Removing schools from the list that have no ref and no article and no indication where they are located (as in remove: Amazing Kids Private School, don't remove for now: Amazing Kids Private School Otjiwarongo)
#Saving refs by repairing link rot
#Tagging references as "dead"
#Removing dead urls with a tag 2018 or older
I'll start with #3 and #4. --Pgallert (talk) 09:57, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncontroversial things to do here