From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John Hlophe article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead.

I disagree that the content of this page qualifies for deletion as db-attack. It is factual in content and neutral in tone. The subject is a prominent South African judge with a high public profile. ChapmanHB 12:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

In my view User:ChapmanHB is correct. Template removed.--Anthony.bradbury 13:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I have added COI and POV tags. It needs to be cleaned up. Remove those tags when they get cleaned up. Bearian 16:46, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evidence? Argument? for tags

What is the ostensible conflict of interest supposed to be? There should be at least some evidence of such a claim esp. as the COI tag carries with it a threat of removal that does not seem justified. Lack of sourcing certainly is problem, though one that should not be hard to rectify with refs or links to reputable S.A. papers such as the Weekly Mail & Guardian or Business Day or Cape Times -- but the sourcing problem is not worse here than at many other articles not under similar threat.

Also I really do not see the supposed POV. Personally I would make the article title the man's full name with a link from "Hlophe" (which interestingly enough means 'white'). And the article is short, hence classified as a stub. But within that limit, it recognizes Mandlakayisa's educational achievements, describes a controversy and his position in it, for which he is particularly well known, and cites later allegations against him as allegations, still under investigation, without stating a conclusion as to their truth or falsity. This all seems balanced enough and to fall within reasonable NPOV.

I would like to ask for a) identification and evidence of ostensible COI, or removal of that tag, and b) more description of the claimed POV problem, so the claim can be evaluated, and if it is reasonable, addressed.

Thanks, Chris Lowe 04:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Recent changes to this page are of questionable objectivity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.241.113.55 (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree. The article also still has problems with unsourced material. I will be going through it in the next few days removing anything for which there is no source. If you want it back you can source it... --Adam Brink 13:49, 6 November 2007 (UTC)