Talk:Kandake of the Sudanese Revolution

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:36, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

What did she do to the revolution other than saying a peom, there are many maytars and people who fought the police and niss forces and didn't get this recognition. What is she to get this just by standing and saying a poem. This should be deleted asap Mark mujtaba (talk) 07:42, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

She's a part of it in the same way poets and artists have always been part of revolutions. They bring light to it. Many Sudanese regard her as an important public figure, and she's relevant enough to retain an article. puggo (talk) 11:33, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Revolution Theif[edit]

Lier lier lier IEzzoo (talk) 23:51, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@IEzzoo: Excuse me? puggo (talk) 01:00, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You heared me @puggo[edit]

She is a revolution thief ! She didn't start the revaluation! She didn't kick out Omer Albashier ! Just a poem !! Everyone knows ! IEzzoo (talk) 18:26, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@IEzzoo and Mark mujtaba: No one says she started the revolution or led the revolution. There's not a single phrase in this article that suggests such a thing. Wikipedia is about notability through coverage in independent media. The person received wide media coverage, her picture (!) was called iconic and representative for women as part of the protests. Wikipedia articles reflect what is covered in other media. Not what people think or perceive. What is covered in other media may not necessarily be the whole picture or the truth. There may be other leaders in the protests, and maybe they also get articles at some point. This depends on if those people become known and receive sufficient media coverage. We don't know yet. pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 18:51, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See also: Unnecessary bluelink to Ieshia Evans[edit]

Hello, I added the bluelink to Photography of Sudan, as her picture is mentioned there as one example of political influence of photography. - But I don't think that the mention of Ieshia Evans in the same list is relevant to this article. Other than the fact that a picture of her also went viral, there is no connection. So I would like to delete this in a few weeks, unless somebody will mention a stringent reason for the bluelink to Ieshia Evans. - Otherwise, it's a good article that certainly meets wp notability standards. Munfarid1 (talk) 14:40, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Need to be re-written similar to Taking a Stand in Baton Rouge and Tank Man[edit]

@Jake Brockman This article need to be rewritten similar to Taking a Stand in Baton Rouge and make more emphasis on the photo, and not the person to avoid the above comments. We are interested on the picture and not the person as per Wikipedia:Notability (people), see [1]. FuzzyMagma (talk) 07:33, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done FuzzyMagma (talk) 15:06, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Kandake of the Sudanese Revolution/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 23:49, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get a review of this done shortly. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:49, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've finished the initial review. The main issue is the coverage. The article doesn't have much information, and some of the information that's present is about Sudanese protest in general instead of being about Salah, Haroun, and the image. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:01, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Thebiguglyalien thanks for taking the time to review the article. I will check and see if there is enough reliable information to add a section about Haroun done. As for the other points I think they are detailed in your review where I still trying to address them below FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:08, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Great work on these edits. I think the article has enough information about the image now to say that it has broad coverage. I'm still not sure about the "similar photographs" and "Sudanese revolution" sections though. They're important topics, but this article is just about this image. Information about other photos should be put in Photography of Sudan, and detailed information about the aftermath of the Khartoum massacre should be in the Khartoum massacre article. If we don't agree on this, I can set the review to request a second opinion so someone else can decide. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:28, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Thebiguglyalien I trimed the Khartoum massacre section by more than half. hope that resolve this issue.
I really thing the "Similar photographs" section fit with the remit of being "broad". I can remove the heading and trim. Would that work? FuzzyMagma (talk) 15:18, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Sudanese revolution section looks good. I don't see why similar photographs need to be mentioned in the article at all. That's why we have a WP:SEEALSO section, so that people can look for similar topics. If you could find a source that compared these photos to Kandake of the Sudanese Revolution and explained how they related to each other, then it would be relevant. But right now, it's an unrelated paragraph that isn't about this topic. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:46, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Thebiguglyalien ok done, section removed and pages added to See also FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:09, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All right. Everything else was addressed already, so I'll mark this is a good article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:13, 20 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well-written
  • "Legacy" and "aftermath" seem like they refer to the same thing. Maybe "Impact and legacy" should be renamed to something like "response" or "spread". Alternatively, the two sections could be merged into one section.

re: section name changed to “response”.

  • representing women's (Kandakas') participation in the revolution. — "Kandakas" might be confusing here because it links to something that seemingly has nothing to do with the revolution. Maybe just say "women's participation" and elaborate on the term in the body of the article.

re: fixed and kept the term as it explains the origin of the picture name

  • A state of emergency was declared in February 2019 as a result of the protests, and the days of 6 and 7 April saw the largest protests since the declaration of this state of emergency – Try to avoid using the same phrase twice in a row. This sentence has "state of emergency was declared" and "declaration of this state of emergency".

re: duplication removed and sentenced rephrased

  • but the demonstrators claimed it was just a change of leadership of the same regime and demanded a civilian transitional council – Try to avoid "claimed", as it can cast doubt on what's being said. Also, this sentence runs on for a while, it might be a good idea to split the change in government and the demonstrator response into two different sentences.

re: rephrased to remove “claimed” and split into to sentences

  • Hundreds of thousands of people heeded the call – "Heeded the call" seems dramatic.

re: changed

  • Some security forces tried to attack the protesters, while the military took their side and fired back. – This could be clearer. Who was where? Who was doing what to whom?

re: clarified

  • The following Sunday & On Monday morning – If we know the date, then does it matter what day of the week it was?

re: Monday removed

  • Police were instructed not to intervene. – Who were these police? Local police? Government police forces?

re: police linked to Sudan (state) police

  • of an initially unnamed woman – This makes it sound like she didn't have a name at all. Maybe "an initially unknown woman" would be better.

re: fixed to unknown

  • since January 2018 and even during earlier protests against the Sudanese government in September 2013 – "Since January 2018" suggests that this was the first time it was used, and "even" seems to dramatize it. It would be clearer if it said that the slogan was used during the 2018–2019 revolution and earlier in the 2011–2013 Sudanese protests.

re: done

  • Haroun shared the best image online – The best image according to whom?

re: “best” remove. I remember reading this somewhere but couldn’t find it

  • a powerful representation of women's leadership in social movements – "Powerful" seems like an opinion.

re: removed

Verifiable with no original research

Sources are generally reliable. The use of Twitter is acceptable in this instance as a primary source. The only possible issue here is the use of the Daily Mirror, which is a questionable source. The statement is already sourced by other sources, so maybe the Daily Mirror should just be removed.

re: Daily Mirror removed

Spotchecks:

re: no, it was not mentioned. reliable sources added

  • [10] Manbiot (2022) – All uses are good.
  • [17] Mezzofiore (2019) – The other citation here supports the claim, but this one doesn't serve much purpose.

re: removed

  • [27] Griffin (2019) – Checked all six uses. Does this source support that The image has also inspired a wave of feminist and women's rights activism in Sudan, with many women taking to the streets and using social media to voice their demands for equality and representation?

re: Not directly, removed as ref 17 covers that sentence

  • Also, "Sudanese revolution's icon" is in quotes, but this quote doesn't seem to appear in the article. Either the quotation should be paraphrased, or only citations using that quote should be included.

re: the quotation were removed, but it a appears in all three articles (not verbatim)

  • [48] Statement by Ms. Alaa Salah – A secondary source would be preferred, but this falls within acceptable use of a primary source.
Broad in its coverage

Broad:

  • I'd like to see more about effects that the image had. Did Haroun have any sort of media following before posting the image? Was it picked up by Sudanese media first? Do we know how this image came to be known outside of Sudan? Was there any political or government response to it, domestically or internationally?

re: I think the "Response and impact" section answer your questions without having to do any original research. Sudanese media is government controlled, so no. I still have a link to the twitter thread where the image was picked up and a video to the whole thing but this is not mentioned in any reliable source. In the video you can see also her face has the old Sudanese flag but again not mentioned in any reliable source. The poem she reciting is well-known, but again no sources. As far as Do we know how this image came to be known outside of Sudan? Was there any political or government response to it, domestically or internationally? I think the response section answers this question, cannot think if you mean something else

  • The article could also say a little more about Salah. It says that she was invited to several interviews and that she co-wrote a book, but it's hard to tell how significant these things were without more details.

re: can you explain what you mean by "significant", as delivering a speech at the 29 October 2019 meeting of the United Nations Security Council is significant. She left the country and lives somewhere in the UK but again I cannot find a reliable source or non primary source to include this.

No excessive detail:

  • A little bit of information about women in the revolution is relevant, but this article should stay focused on Salah and the image. The sentences about women's involvement in protest since the 1950s aren't that relevant.

re: removed

  • The list also included Tank Man in 1989 and self-immolation of Thích Quảng Đức in 1963 among many. – This is not relevant.

re: removed (was there to emphasise significance)

re: I strongly disagree on this one as this photo might be the most well-known but the other photos were also circulated, especially Yasuyoshi Chiba photo. I understand the counter-argument of the need to stay focused on the topic, but I do think including that section cause a distraction but rather points to other equally great photos.

  • The "Sudanese revolution" section also isn't about this topic. The Salah and the image aren't mentioned once in the whole section. This covers the aftermath of the protests. This article should focus on the aftermath of the image. A few sentences about the end of the sit-in would be fine, but this goes into too much detail on things that weren't caused by the image.

re: Sudanese revolution section is for the context on why the image matters. no source mentions Salah expereince before as she was not a leader and did not have a role. There are many pictures similar to this but this is the one that picked by media as it succinctly described the revolution, not - necessarily - Salah (remember for a while no one cared about the person). There is a focus on the aftermath, as Salah became to be known, and also the aftermath for the context where this picture existed, i.e., the Sudanese revolution. I can see they might be an issue of style, but I am also bound with where the coverage lays. To quote Lana Haroun (the photographer) "It is not about the photo ... it is about Sudanese people and Sudan's situation now"

Neutral

The sequence of events is described neutrally. The significance of the image is explained without presenting the protesters and the government as heroes or villains.

Stable

No recent disputes.

Illustrated

Image is obviously relevant and has a valid non-free use tag. It was directed at an older title for the article, but I've fixed it, so it's all good. Caption is suitable.

Did you know nomination[edit]

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 BorgQueen (talk) 05:29, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Created by FuzzyMagma (talk). Self-nominated at 17:02, 23 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Kandake of the Sudanese Revolution; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.
Overall: @FuzzyMagma: Good article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:32, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kandake_of_the_Sudanese_Revolution&oldid=1206363962"