Talk:Makwerekwere/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion 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.

---

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

Nominator: FuzzyMagma (talk · contribs) 12:22, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Reviewer: Adabow (talk · contribs) 23:33, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	some questions about sources below
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	one sentence with very close paraphrasing
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	File:Julius Malema 2011-09-14.jpg is released under cc-sa licence
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Comments on prose

• "Matsinhe argued..." – Please define/introduce Matsinhe. I suggest "Sociologist David Matsinge argued..."

• Y fixed.

Reference spotchecks

• " Zambia (where many South African exiles lived before 1994)" is not supported by ref 2

• Y Fixed by adding a source for the information in brackets

• The new reference discusses the ANC in exile in Zambia. It doesn't support that "a significant number of South African exiles resided prior to 1994".

removed weasel wording, i.e., significant

• Phrasing of "(in a non-derogatory sense) to refer to all Shonas from Zimbabwe (then known as Rhodesia)" is directly from Ref 2. Suggest paraphrasing

• Y paraphrased. FYI, It was not me who added this line including the unreferenced part, see this edit. Anyhow, it is now fixed.

• Y Refs 10 and 11 verify statement
• "The term has become so pervasive that it has been included in dictionaries as “an offensive and derogatory slur used in South Africa to describe foreigners from other African countries.”[19]" – This is only supported by reference one dictionary (which has now closed)

• Y I have now added Oxford and Collins Dictionary too

• None of these references supports the quotation. The Collins and Dictionary.com entries are for amakwerekwere. Is this term a variation of makwerekwere? If so, this should be mentioned in the article.

removed the quotation, but kept "The term has become so pervasive that it has been included in dictionaries". makwerekwere, kwerekwere, and amakwerekwere are variance, see the Etymology section.

• The Macmillan link is broken as the dictionary has closed.

I tried to find it in the hard copy but the one I have is the 2007 and it is not there. I removed the link

• The Ray Leathern article doesn't even mention the word.

It mention it in the comment sections. I should have looked better. Removed the ref

• Are refs 28 and 29 (Khanya/Somali Christians) reliable? They look like self-published sources

• Y 28 (now 29) is a BBC video on YouTube. 29 (was 30) is surely self published, thus the sentence was removed.

• The BBC video is interesting, but it doesn't support the sentence "These victims are often scapegoated for various issues[...]and are used as a physical reminder of difference"

Removed the "and are used as a physical reminder of difference"

• Sorry, I could have been clearer that somalichristians.org looks to be a self-published blog

I am not sure if it self referenced, but found the same information - although fragmented on on South African Human Rights Commission website and the other part on a 2011 article.

• " In 2004, Boom Shaka released the kwaito classic "Makwerekwere"[37] which discouraged xenophobia.[38]" – Not supported by references

• Y 37 is a link to the song itself on YouTube, replaced by 39 which mention the song. add new 40 and 41 commenting on the song itself. I got the release date wrong also, it should be 1993 and not 2004. I confused it with Lolilo - Makwerekwere (really bad song)

• Ref 39 doesn't support any content in the sentence; is it needed?

it support the kwaito part of the sentence and the song existence. but I will remove it as redundant as the information can be found on the other sources

• Sunday News calls the song "Amakwere" and Viljoen calls it "Kwere Kwere", but the article text says "KwereKwere"

The name on the CD is "KwereKwere" Track 2 (no included next to the name) but "Amakwere" or any other variance is the same word.

I'm placing the review on hold while the comments I've made above are considered. Adabow (talk) 00:46, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to review the page and for the feedback to improve it. I have fixed the issues that you have raised FuzzyMagma (talk) 14:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your work, FuzzyMagma. I've commented on your responses inline. I still have concerns about the verifiability of some content by reliable sources. I will go through and do further source spotchecking later. I strongly recommend that you go through the article and ensure that each statement is supported by the reference used in the article. Adabow (talk) 22:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

I have provided more details above , hope it will ease your concerns FuzzyMagma (talk) 09:26, 18 July 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I've added the variant versions of the term into the first sentence and removed Urban Dictionary as it is a user-created source. Otherwise, I'm happy to pass the article. Adabow (talk) 08:58, 20 July 2024 (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.