Talk:2020 Phala Phala Robbery

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

South Africa Low‑importance

	South Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Title

The robbery occurred in February 2020, not in 2022. -- Mooonswimmer 15:05, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

Farmgate (scandal) covers the same event, and so should be merged with this page. I suggest using 2020 Phala Phala Robbery as the final target as it the older article with the more neutral title. Note that this proposal emerged out of a discussion elsewhere (Talk:Cyril Ramaphosa#Merge 2020 Phala Phala Robbery). Klbrain (talk) 05:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Two articles had been created at the same time with different titles. Once discovered, both updated with same content until the decision could be made. Phala Phala seems to be the more used version in SA newspapers. Farmgate would need a redirect. Conlinp (talk) 11:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IOL as a source

I've raised this previously[1] at the reliable sources noticeboard, but we need to consider whether IOL and its related publications are reliable. Park3r (talk) 00:00, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"According to wikipedia, African Transformation Movement leader Vuyo Zungula tabled an official motion on 14 June 2022, that parliament investigate President Cyril Ramaphosa by forming a Section 89 Committee Inquiry over allegations the latter had violated section 89 of the Constitution."

[2].

IOL is using Wikipedia as a source. It cannot be regarded as a WP:RS any longer. Park3r (talk) 06:57, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Park3r: Hi several months later! I agree it's a concern – there has been such crap on there in the last few years. But you're right that the archives are invaluable and it still covers some uncontroversial stories that other online news sources don't (human interest stuff, arts and music scene etc). For that reason I wouldn't support a blanket unreliable designation but I'd support some kind of caution flag, applying (as you've suggested) particularly to recent articles (and politically sensitive claims).

I'd be up for some kind of general collective discussion among SA editors about source quality, especially in politics articles – among other things, it might be helpful to have a guideline that allows foreign editors to better gauge what counts as significant and reliable coverage in the SA context. There is this, but it could use an update and reaffirmation – for example I think News24 is now far more reliable than IOL and doesn't deserve the tabloid label, and there are some sources (subnational ones like the Daily Dispatch, plus the Sowetan etc) not included that are useful and quite reliable. Jlalbion (talk) 18:05, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]