Template:Did you know nominations/Esau Chulu
- 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: rejected by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) 03:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Esau Chulu
- ... that the appointment of Esau Chulu as chairperson of the Electoral Commission of Zambia received overwhelming public approval, with four different political parties complimenting the decision? Source: https://www.lusakatimes.com/2015/04/16/appointment-of-esau-chulu-as-electoral-commission-of-zambia-chairperson-receives-overwhelming-support
- Reviewed: NA 3rd submission
Created by 19jshi (talk). Self-nominated at 01:37, 6 April 2022 (UTC).
- Comment: Is that unusual? Since I imagine Zambia has more than 4 political parties. Juxlos (talk) 08:27, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, as fas as I understand it is unusual because the parties in favor of his appointment were the opposition to the party of the president who appointed him.
- @19jshi: Are there any other ways of wording it? If someone isn't familiar whatsoever with Zambian politics (which, to be honest, is going to be most cases), that wouldn't sound to interesting. In Indonesia, for example, the government coalition has 7 parties, so 4 would if anything sound small. Maybe contrast it with his predecessors, if supported by sources? Juxlos (talk) 13:48, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
New enough, long enough. No QPQ needed. Earwig has flagged some problematic passages. A bigger issue is that this piece doesn't say alot. I fact, doing a google search, I came up with other news sources, like this one, Moonga, Chambwa (2020-09-25). "ESAU CHULU MUST RESIGN…he's shown weakness, dishonesty – Sacika"., that seem to say there is more that could be written. I'm not inclined to pass this one. --evrik (talk) 00:37, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
There has been no action on this. I'm going to go ahead and say no. --evrik (talk) 17:39, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
