Talk:Hubert Maga/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

• I'm looking at this article. I hate that accursed "under review" template that folks use on WP:GAN when they start reviewing an article, so I never use it. I think it discourages others from joining in.
• Oi, is it kosher to be in GAN and PR at the same time? I know it's not cool for FAC.
  • Yes, I've seen somewhere that it is allowed. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
• I'm seeing some misspelled words such as "experiance" and "incompetetance". Firefox has a spell checker. If you dislike Firefox, you can copy/paste the printable version of the article to MSWord and spell check there.
  • I don't know how to install Firefox and don't own word. The best I can do is run it through crappy Google Docs, which I will now. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:23, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
• Sudden name-drop of "Peperty". Who is s/he, why is s/he mentioned, is s/he really noteworthy, etc.?
  • Decalo 1976 doesn't really mention anything about him except that he was a French administrator and he encouraged Maga. I added a note that we don't know his first name. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:58, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
• "Maga ran to that role".. I don't understand. Do you mean "Maga ran for that office"? Is this a translation from French?
  • Yes, but I want to let you know that I asked user:AlbertHerring, a level 5 French speaker, to translate the assembly page for me. Clarified. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 23:14, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
• "Northern Ethnical Group" .. I'm betting this is a French title; should be French in italics then English (I think, see this).
  • Added French name. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 23:20, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
• "the domination of southern Dahomey in the French colony's politics" ... ambiguous. Is southern Dahomey dominating, or being dominated?
  • Southern Dahomey dominating. Clarified. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 23:21, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
• More laterLing.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 21:18, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
• Sorry so slow. Busy in RL + distracted by on-wiki affairs e.g. Battle of Red Cliffs on main page etc. Hope to get to this tonight... Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 06:54, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
• More comments
• how many body guards were executed? "several commoners, and Maga bodyguard..."
  • The source doesn't say how many. Nishkid can send you a copy. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 11:58, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• what contested 18 seats?
  • Changed to "Apithy and Ahomadégbé-Tomêtin agreed to split the 18 seats they contested in a southwest constituency among themselves as a result of a mediation performed by Félix Houphouët-Boigny." ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• what does "designate a role" mean? "Maga appointed Apithy Minister of State, though he did not designate a role."
  • He didn't really do anything. Clarified. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
    • That would be called a minister without portfolio in England. Doesn't mean that they don't do anything, just that they don't have a designated role like transport, or foreign policy. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• what home turf? besides "home turf" too informal "Back on the home turf..."
  • You're right. Changed to "home country". ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• "Ahomadégbé-Tomêtin convinced the trade unions that he owned..." he literally owned them?
  • Basically. Perhaps "operated" is a better term. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• "where 90 of the people had voted for the U.D.D." Do you mean 90 percent?
  • Good catch. Fixed. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• "to quench his apparently unquenchable thirst for power." very POV! Please change!
  • How about just "thirst for power"? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:40, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• "The pattern of coups continued. On December 10, 1969, Émile Derlin Zinsou was overthrown by ..." How did Zinsou get the office? You skipped something important here.
  • Clarified. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• This doesn't quite make sense: "Parents of students whose schools followed the strike were allowed back to school on November 19, and only if they would not participate in more demonstrations for fear of being expelled from the educational system of Dahomey"
  • Changed to "Students whose schools followed the strike were allowed back to school on November 19, and only if their parents signed documents that said they would not participate in more demonstrations. If they failed to comply, they would be expelled from the educational system of Dahomey." ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• Structure lifted straight from one text [probably Decalo]? See "On May 26 Teveodjré notified Maga that Ahomadégbé-Tomêtin had plotted to assassinate the president, but he and 11 other dissidents were arrested." who is Teveodjré? And several bits of structure, transitions, etc. assume a stance/voice that seems lifted straight from a book. I deleted a few (perhaps that was a bad idea) but left others intact.
  • That's how I write. I did not take the structure from Decalo, and besides, that sentence was cited to Matthews. Teveodjré was mentioned in the previous section; I have added a link for all those who didn't read that. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:13, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 06:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Second opinion

I agree with the comments made by Ling.Nut. There are a few issues that stand out for me:

• The prose needs some serious attention. A few examples:

• "The other was filled by Dahomey premier and deputy Sourou-Migan Apithy." By the time I got to this sentence I'd forgotten what the subject (the second seat) was.
  • Clarified. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• "Capitalising on growing cynicism regarding the southern Dahomey dominating the French colony's politics ..." What does "the southern Dahomey" mean? Is it the people living in the south of Dahomey? If so, shouldn't it be "the southern Dahomey's domination"?
  • 'Twas only a misplaced "the". Fixed. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• "During his first term in the Assembly his activity was weak ...". This whole sentence is unidiomatic.
  • "He did not accomplish much"? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• Why is it "R.D.D" and not "RDD", as with "RAD"?
  • Isn't this acceptable? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
    • It would be if it was the consistent scheme, but it appears not to be. If it's RAD, then why not RDD? --Malleus Fatuorum 22:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
      • Sorry, can't find RAD. The period scheme is what I use for the rest of the article. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
        • My mistake; I meant RDA, not RAD. But I see that you've changed that now, to R.D.A. (Is that what the quoted actually calls it?) The wikilinked articles themselves though use RDD and RDA. Why have you chosen to adopt a different scheme? --Malleus Fatuorum 23:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
          • I believe (I don't have it at hand, sorry) that that is the style that Matthews used, and I just went along with it for the rest of the article. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 01:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
• "However, Ahomadégbé-Tomêtin made it clear that he would not allow Apithy to remain the Prime Minister of Dahomey, but Apithy was not going to listen to his demands." Why the tense switch?
  • Fixed. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• "... a list of candidates of whom whoever received a majority ...". The subject is "list of candidates", so "whom" is inappropriate.
  • I cannot fid this. Would you mind fixing it? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
    • I've rewritten that section, but as I really didn't understand what was being said in the first place you'll need to check what I've done. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
      • No, you were correct. Thanks. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 01:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

• I'm dubious about some of the translation. For instance "... redistricted Dahomey into one electoral constituency." Is there a verb "to redistrict" in your dictionary? I'm also unfamiliar with the word "ethnical", as in "Northern Ethnical Group". "Back on the home turf" is unidiomatic, and is probably a little too informal for an encyclopedic tone in any event.
  • Redistricted is a word that my colleagues and I frequently use in everyday speech, and I do not believe that it is slang. If you have a problem with "Ethnical", yell at Matthews; he did the translation. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
    • You and your colleagues may use whatever neologisms you choose amongst yourselves. However, this article is supposed to be written in standard English. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
      • I see you have fixed it. For what it's worth, The Free Dictionary recognises it as the past tense of "redistrict". I knew I didn't make this up. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 01:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
• There seem to be several disjunctions and non sequitors. One example: "Maga served as a schoolmaster from 1936 to 1946, giving him considerable influence among the uneducated." In what way does being a schoolmaster give one influence over those who have presumably not attended school?
  • Fixed. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Doesn't seem to be fixed to me. "Born a peasant in 1916, Maga served as a schoolmaster from 1936 to 1946, giving him considerable influence among the uneducated." How is that an improvement? --Malleus Fatuorum 23:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
      • I see "Maga was appointed director of the school in 1945.[7] Along with his new wife, he began increasing his influence among uneducated citizens." Are you looking at a previous version of the page?
        • I'm looking at the second sentence of the lead. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:06, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
          • Oh. Howc does "Born a peasant in 1916, Maga served as a schoolmaster from 1936 to 1945, where he gradually gained considerable influence among the uneducated." sound? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 00:11, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
            • In a word, strange. How would a schoolmaster gain influence amongst those who presumably never attended school? Being a schoolmaster isn't a place anyway, so "where" is inappropriate even if the claim is true.--Malleus Fatuorum 00:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
              • You're right. "During which time" is probably a better phrase. My understanding is that he taught the uneducated, though the sources don't explicitly mention this, just that he gained influence during the time period. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 01:17, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
• Terms and names are introduced without explanation, for instance: "He also feared Maga going 'toward the RDA'". What's the RDA? Why "also"?
  • A link is provided. Removed "also". ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
    • The reader should not be forced to follow link to understand what it is that you're trying to say. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
      • Added brackets. I'm unsure whether you're supposed to use nowiki tags in articlespace; that's the only way this works. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 01:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
• There are some very striking differences in writing style in this article, which makes me a little suspicious that sections have been copied from some of the sources verbatim.
  • Nope. I write differently of different days. I don't really have a specific style. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• --Malleus Fatuorum 11:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

• This needs explaining: "On August 1, 1960, Maga traveled to Paris on official business.[22][27] After meetings with Houphouët-Boigny, Dahomey gained its independence." Was the official business to negotiate Dahomey's independence? Or was the meeting which secured independence simply serendipitous? --Malleus Fatuorum 13:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
  • How about "official business regarding the political status of Dahomey"? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
    • I think something along those lines would be a significant improvement. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:58, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
      • Consider it done. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 22:04, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
• Are all the dates correct in the Premier of Dahomey section? Maga came to power in 1959, but the quotation from his 1960 speech begins: "On September 28, 1958 ...". --Malleus Fatuorum 13:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Jeez, thakns for catching that. I meant 1959 in the speech. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:28, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
• "In January, someone threw coconuts at its tin roof as it was under construction." Is this really worth mentioning? If it is, then its significance has to be explained. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Removed. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:51, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
• I think this article has the record for the logest GA review ever. And I dunno if I'll have time to do it justice! I did just now notice that "Carter, Gwendolen Margare" is a compilation, Carter is the editor. Now, the only referencing formats I ever use are APA and LSA (a flavor of APA). But in those formats, you have to cite the author of the chapter from which the info was drawn, like this (using the Harvrefcol template):
• Tsuchida, Shigeru (1983). "Austronesian Languages in Formosa" in S.A Wurm and Hiro Hattori (Eds.) Language Atlas of the Pacific Area. Canberra: Australian National University

If you are using an established format that does not require the author of a chapter to be cited, please let me know.

• • Take as long and be as thorough as you want. I'm aiming for FAC so I would like the comments to judge against the FA criteria, rather than GA. FWIW, Felix Houphouet Boigny's GA review was longer. Anyway, added chapter. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 18:25, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
• I may try to foist this review off on someone else. Or I may try to actually finish it tomorrow. We'll see. Either way, I apologize for the ungodly long wait. I know I would be pissed. Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 13:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
• " before retiring in 1957" retiring from what? Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 14:01, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Before retiring from the assembly. Clarified. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 18:31, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
• "Maga initially denied the existence, and to this day details are unclear." Denied the existence of what? --Malleus Fatuorum 16:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Its. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 18:38, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

FA Musings When I was looking at this article, I simply typed in "Hubert Maga" and searched Google books. It was an eye-opening experience. This article currently takes entirely for granted chunks of background knowledge that are crucial to the reader's understanding of the political context: esp., the country being divided into three de facto tribal zones (what tribes each region?), tribalism, the number of coups, etc. If you read all the article and think carefully about the events, you can perceive most of this... but it shouldn't require such inductive reasoning. Please rewrite it extensively before taking it into FAC, or I will surely reappear in my role as Cranky Old SOB and scream bloody murder. :-) Give the reader a clear understanding of the background. No no no this is not a threat. I'm trying to let you know this so you can work on it. Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 10:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'll try to expand on the background. I don't think anything on the coups are particularly relevant to Maga other than what I have already stated. Is the material in the "Background" section at 1963 Dahomeyan coup d'etat what you are envisioning? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 00:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Recap

Ling.Nut has asked me to take over this review, which I've agreed to do. I think the best way to bring this to a conclusion is to take a final thorough look through the article and list what still remains to be done, which I'll do over the next day or so. In the meantime, can you address Ling's point about Dahomey's political background and tribalism?

--Malleus Fatuorum 14:41, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Note that there is a more recent revised 1995 third edition of Decalo's work on Dahomey/Benin, which may be useful for this article. See WP:Good article reassessment/Jean-Baptiste Hachème/1. Geometry guy 23:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

• I'm concerned about the missing political background, and in particular the tribalism present in Dahomey during Maga's time. I'm unconvinced that this addition to the lead: "He arose on a political scene where one's power was dictated by what region in Dahomey they lived" does the topic justice. I think we need to have a short background section describing what the tribal divisions in the country were, and greater clarity surrounding the tribal allegiances of each of the main protagonists in this story. What tribes are there anyway? What proportion of the general population belongs to each?
  • If you notice, I also added a paragraph under "Deputy to the French National Assembly" concerning the topic. Is that good? ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
    • I'd like to see the tribalism clearly and succinctly described in the lead, as it's obviously fundamental to understanding the political environment in Dahomey during Maga's time. I don't want to have to go searching for it. --Malleus Fatuorum 21:51, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
      • I expanded the lead slightly. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 23:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
• It appears to be significant that Maga converted to Christianity, but I get no idea of what that significance was from this article.
  • "according to journalist Ronald Matthews" it ""was not so common for a northerner"". I'm not sure if this is really significant, but it is mentioned in several books. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 21:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
    • It's another disconnected comment though. Converted to Christianity from which other religion? Why? With what consequences? --Malleus Fatuorum 03:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
      • I mentioned he was raised under Islam in the first paragraph. It's just a little tidbit in his life. I'm not sure if it had any consequences, and I had nothing to expand upon; I'm simply trying to put everything in chronological order. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs/editor review)}~ 23:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm reluctantly going to have to close this nomination now, as not listed. The article has improved substantially during this extended review, but it still does not meet the good article criteria, specifically falling short in its coverage (3a) and prose quality (1a). If you disagree with this assessment then you can nominate the article at WP:GAR for a community review. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.