Template:Did you know nominations/'Neile Alina 'Mantoa Fanana
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:42, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
'Neile Alina 'Mantoa Fanana
[edit]... that 'Neile Alina 'Mantoa Fanana's appointment as King's Council was opposed by the Lesotho Law Society?? the Lesotho Law Society has written a strongly worded letter to the office of the Chief Justice expressing their dissatisfaction with the lawyers who have been nominated for the prestigious title of King's Counsel ... The lawyers believe that Thetsane and Fanana do not meet the stipulated criteria. ...he Law Society also argues that Fanana has not been practicing as an advocate for a period of fifteen years and therefore she cannot be considered to have rendered a significant service
- ALT1:... that 'Neile Alina 'Mantoa Fanana was the first female ombudsman of Lesotho? ‘Neile Alina ‘Mantoa Fanana, 65, has been appointed Lesotho’s new Ombudsman. ... She becomes the first female Mosotho to hold the position.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Spaceport Camden
Moved to mainspace by Dumelow (talk). Self-nominated at 10:19, 11 November 2017 (UTC).
Article is new enough and long enough. A bit concerned about things like She attended several human rights fora and underwent training programmes on conflict resolution, human rights and humanitarian law.
(source) andreceived further training in conflict resolution, human rights and humanitarian law.
(article) which are needlessly similar. I am not sure if Wikileaks is considered to be a reliable source and not certain about this either (which also does not seem to support the text sourced to it). This source doesn't work for me. ALT1 seems more interesting to me. Both are cited inline but have sourcing concerns. QPQ is good. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:10, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus, thanks for the review. When I wrote the article the sentence you mentioned stumped me a bit as I couldn't figure out how to reowrd it, I figured they were fairly common expressions anyway - I have now rewritten it slightly which I hope moves it far enough away from the source text. This source is the annual report published by the Lesotho Ombudsman's Office, I have used it to back up the King's Counsel appointment (KC is mentioned as a post nominal), as otherwise it is only attributed to WikiLeaks. Strange that the Lesotho Times page is not working for you, I can view it OK - I have added an internet archive link as a back-up. With regards Wikileaks as a source I seem to recall back at the time the diplomatic service leaks were happening that the consensus was they could be used as long as they were attributed "according to a leak" or similar. Consensus may have moved on since then, I have been a bit out of touch. I have reworded the article slightly to make it clear where the leak was from. I have struck the original hook above - Dumelow (talk) 15:00, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Based on what I get on WP:RSN it seems like using Wikileaks in this context is questionable. The problem I have is that while the question is "Are Wikileaks items reliable?" the answer is often "Wikileaks is a primary source" which does not answer the question. Personally I'd omit the Wikileaks-sourced material, especially since it looks negative and is on a BLP. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:12, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- No problem, good to get an opinion on this. You are right that we should be careful with a BLP anyway. I will remove the section sourced to Wikileaks. As this will take the article below the 1,500 character threshold and I do not have access to any further sources on the subject to expand the article I will withdraw this DYK nomination. Thanks - Dumelow (talk) 16:03, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Dumelow: I wonder if it could be explained a bit what a King's Counsel and their role is. While we don't want coatracking a bit of explanation of the roles involved may bring the topic back to sufficient length. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus. I expanded it a little with info on some journal articles that she wrote and I had overlooked. Let me know what you think - Dumelow (talk) 17:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- AGFing on them. I don't think source #4 adds anything to the article, probably because it needs pagenumber specific citations. The Wikileaks source is now only used for a fairly trivial claim, although I am surprised there are no press reports or government reports. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:58, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus, cana tick now be added to this? - Dumelow (talk) 21:53, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
- AGFing on them. I don't think source #4 adds anything to the article, probably because it needs pagenumber specific citations. The Wikileaks source is now only used for a fairly trivial claim, although I am surprised there are no press reports or government reports. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:58, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus. I expanded it a little with info on some journal articles that she wrote and I had overlooked. Let me know what you think - Dumelow (talk) 17:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Dumelow: I wonder if it could be explained a bit what a King's Counsel and their role is. While we don't want coatracking a bit of explanation of the roles involved may bring the topic back to sufficient length. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:08, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- No problem, good to get an opinion on this. You are right that we should be careful with a BLP anyway. I will remove the section sourced to Wikileaks. As this will take the article below the 1,500 character threshold and I do not have access to any further sources on the subject to expand the article I will withdraw this DYK nomination. Thanks - Dumelow (talk) 16:03, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Based on what I get on WP:RSN it seems like using Wikileaks in this context is questionable. The problem I have is that while the question is "Are Wikileaks items reliable?" the answer is often "Wikileaks is a primary source" which does not answer the question. Personally I'd omit the Wikileaks-sourced material, especially since it looks negative and is on a BLP. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:12, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus, thanks for the review. When I wrote the article the sentence you mentioned stumped me a bit as I couldn't figure out how to reowrd it, I figured they were fairly common expressions anyway - I have now rewritten it slightly which I hope moves it far enough away from the source text. This source is the annual report published by the Lesotho Ombudsman's Office, I have used it to back up the King's Counsel appointment (KC is mentioned as a post nominal), as otherwise it is only attributed to WikiLeaks. Strange that the Lesotho Times page is not working for you, I can view it OK - I have added an internet archive link as a back-up. With regards Wikileaks as a source I seem to recall back at the time the diplomatic service leaks were happening that the consensus was they could be used as long as they were attributed "according to a leak" or similar. Consensus may have moved on since then, I have been a bit out of touch. I have reworded the article slightly to make it clear where the leak was from. I have struck the original hook above - Dumelow (talk) 15:00, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Still unclear on source #4, sorry. The pagenumber given appears to be wrong. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:27, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
- Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus. I was using it to back-up the Wikileaks source with regards her status as a King's Counsel. This is from her title given at the bottom of page one of the report as "N. A. M. FANANA KC", where KC stands for King's Counsel. No further information is taken from this source. Thanks - Dumelow (talk) 13:42, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:45, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
