Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Paul Kagame/archive1

@Amakuru, Buidhe, and Nikkimaria: where do we stand on bringing this back? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:40, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: I have been making updates since we last spoke - the sections on his relations with DRC and Uganda and the US/UK/EU have been brought up to date. I think some more material will be needed on the most recent election in 2017. Then after that, there's the issue of balance between favourable and unfavourable views of him, which Buidhe raised initially. I haven't had a chance to address that yet, which I think will mean going through some of the more recent scholarly papers and including summaries of what they say. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 11:31, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When do you think you might be able to get to that? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:26, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: it's hard to give a precise figure on it unfortunately. I will definitely commit to doing the work, because I agree with Buidhe that the new material casts a very new light on this subject and should be incorporated into the article. Reading through the Caplan article felt a bit like a case of deja vu, because he details exactly the concerns that I have had since I began researching this subject. Everyone until recently who had written about Kagame and the RPF either completely loves them or completely hates them, with almost no objective in-between. Which puts us as Wikipedians in a position we shouldn't be in, of having to decide how to balance those two conflicting narratives. Caplan's paper for the first time (other than throwaway comments by Dallaire and Kinzer about how they suspect Kagame of responsibility for large numbers of deaths) attempts to reconcile and analyse these conflicting viewpoints. And I can certainly work through the article revising the pre- and post-genocide narrative accordingly. I haven't yet read the other papers Buidhe mentions, but if they contain similar deep analysis then that will be a very good development. It will take me time to work through all that though, likely several months, unless there's anyone who will step up and help me with it. I realise that FARs are usually measured in weeks rather than months, so if the solution is to demote the article from FA now and then maybe seek to promote it back in 6 months to a year once I've done everything, then so be it. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 12:31, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Amakuru, Buidhe, and Nikkimaria: checking back as I process through URFA, and another month has passed. Where does this stand? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:03, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SandyGeorgia: I have been steadily making updates since we last spoke, including in the past week. I'm up to about the civil war now, in terms of incorporating developments mentioned by Gerald Caplan in his paper. Once I've done everything from that, I'll be working through the text seeing which bits cited to Kinzer's book look like they need tweaking/removing and which are factual/uncontroversial. Plus look at the long list of other sources which Buidhe mentoined at Talk:Paul Kagame. So it's taking time to complete, but it's not stalled. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 12:22, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thx! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:36, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]