Jump to content

Talk:Johan Derksen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeJohan Derksen was a Sports and recreation good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 7, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed


GA review

[edit]

I've had a look through this article, and I've put it on hold. It does not yet meet the WP:WIAGA criteria, most obviously because of the quality of the prose. The article could have done with a good copyedit by a native English speaker before being nominated, but no matter, it's here now. I really don't like failing any article, so I'm optimistic that if we work together we can get this article its little green badge and I won't have to fail it. :-)

Moving in to look at some of the detail:

  • I think that the lead needs to be expanded, to better summarise the article. It doesn't mention Derksen's career at Stax for instance, or his obviously keen interest in music.
  • "Derksen hates "happy music" ...". A bit informal, doesn't sound very encyclopedic, and it may not even be true. He may have changed his mind by now. If you wanted to keep that in, better to say something like "In 2005, Derkson claimed in a television interview that he hated "happy music" ..", along with a citation.
  • "Derksen himself is noted as one of the most vile players in the division". This really is too much POV, and may even be considered to be libellous. Vile? Is that a quotation, or your opinion? If it's a quotation, then there needs to be a citation right after it. The tense is wrong as well of course, as he is no longer playing.
  • "MVV had learned it's best to shield their precious boys in away games". Their precious boys doesn't really work. Better something like "valuable players".
  • Amounts of money are given in guilders, but that will not mean very much to a reader outside of the Netherlands. I'd suggest adopting the MoS guideline: "Conversions of less familiar currencies may be provided in terms of more familiar currencies, such as the euro or the US dollar. Conversions should be in parentheses after the original currency, with the year given as a rough point of reference; for example, 1,000 Swiss francs (US$763 in 2005), rounding to the nearest whole unit."
  • "He fulfilled his duties as a conscript and was employed as a textile salesman." This makes it sound like he was conscripted and became a textile salesman during the time of his conscription. Conscription is something that may not be familiar to all readers outside of the Netherlands, so a short explanation would probably be in order. Was he conscripted into the army?


There are a lot of prose problems caused, I think, by this article not having been proofread by a native English speaker. In a spirit of collaboration I am prepared to deal with that proofreading issue if the editors will deal with the other review issues that will come up, because this is by no means yet a complete review. As I said at the start, this article is now on hold for up to 7 days to allow time for all of the issues to be resolved. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I've had a think about this overnight, and having read the article again and come across this "Sulking, but without demur the fans watched from behind the gate how the Veendam players laughed, scornfully, from behind the safe windows of their coach" I've come to the conclusion that the amount of work required for this article to achieve GA is now really far more than can reasonably be expected to be completed in seven days, now of course only four days. My offer to help with the English was conditional on the nominator(s) assisting with the content, which has not happened. This article needs a lot of work from a native English speaker to get to GA status, but I'm afraid that I no longer have the time available to devote to it. Good luck with it in the future, but for now I have no option other than to fail this article. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 04:24, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Johan Derksen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Johan Derksen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:25, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Racism controversies

[edit]

While my edits were in good faith, they were unfortunately reverted by WA8MTWAYC. Some clarifications why I think my edits are important:

  • Removing "sometimes": The controversies around Derksen are a returning theme. It is obvious that this is not his only contribution, from the above, but it definitely does not warrant the "sometimes" (which suggests that it is rare). The criticism is broad, even if not constant.
  • Removing "Ghanaian": Akwasi is Dutch, but his Ghanaian nationality (if he even has it) is irrelevant. If you think that is important, just say he's Black. The fact that he's Ghanaian or not does not make a difference for the 'joke' or criticism. I thought it more helpful to just link to his article, where people can find out all about his heritage, accomplishments and life values. It's not relevant for Derksen's article.
  • Removing " That rapper insisted, during a Black Lives Matter protest at the Dam Square, Amsterdam, that he would kick a Zwarte Piet in the face, thereby inciting violence": This is just an excuse to justify a racist joke. It was already mentioned that Akwasi was a protester against Zwarte Piet - anything beyond that is not helpful in describing the actions of Derksen.
  • Made explicit that Derksen refused to withdraw his words: The current phrasing could be mistaken that he may still, or that he never got around to it. The opposite is true: he was rather explicit that he would not withdraw his words, or apologize. I think that is a helpful fact to illustrate the context.

All in all, I thought my edits were reasonably even handed. I would appreciate a third party taking a look at this. effeietsanders 18:28, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • It may also suggest that he's constantly (e.g. every week) in the news in a negative manner. Maybe better to change it to "he regularly hits the headlines..."
  • Agree here, but his quite aggressive remarks were the only reason he made that "joke" (Derksen explained this reasoning yesterday on VI), so he is in a way important in this section.
  • Racist or not, the opinions and reasonings vary and it's very controversial. Maybe better to rewrite this as well, to make it clear Derksen made that "joke" because of Akwasi's speech.
  • Done, hope you agree here.
Yep, as I said it's a controversial topic, so it's best to neutralize it as much as possible (a.k.a. not picking sides). Hope we agree here. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 18:45, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(I restructured your response to make sure it's clear who typed what - feel free to reframe it, if that distorted it)
As for the general thought: It's important to provide an evenhanded review - that does not mean filtering out controversies. By putting in too many weasel words and nuance, you can also pick sides by defending more than is justified based on the sources. Probably not intended, but still.
I could see that 'regularly' does justice to the frequency indeed. That would be fine with me. As for the second/third point, I don't see a foundation for how these pieces of context actually are providing a helpful explanation. Derksen has spoken out against this activist well before this particular event: he claims that this is the reasoning after the fact, that does not mean it's true. I'm not even sure if he wouldn't have made the same joke with a different name (Simons, for example) if this happened to have been more front and center in his mind. All in all, I don't think that the context is particularly relevant, and it may suggest some kind of 'revenge' that I can't find support for (which would actually work against Derksen). The same is true for Ghanaian. If there is a claim by Derksen that he justified it with 'but he was XYZ and therefore it's OK', then it would be helpful to include that claim - but I would include that as such: a claim (e.g. "Derksen claimed that XYZ partially justified his joke". effeietsanders 20:50, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with the restructuring. I also agree that the article should be neutral (of course), but I have never intended or claimed it should filter out controversies, as he is a remarkable figure (yeah, let's put it that way). The reason I made edits in the first place was because I felt this section was too negative towards him ("often criticized"; not inserting Akwasi and the importance of his speech on his joke, but simply putting him down as a activist; et cetera). I'm not here to point my finger, or to pick sides. I made my edits in good faith, just as you did.
I've removed the sentence that described why Akwasi hit the headlines. An explanation of Derksen himself (featuring Akwasi) is now present in the prose, so I hope it better explains why he put himself in that position. Also reworded Akwasi's introduction to "black Dutch rapper", to clarify why he was compared to that protester in the first place.
That's it from me, hope we agree on the amends I've made. WA8MTWAYC (talk) 22:24, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Controversialism not mentioned in the lead of this article (anymore)

[edit]

Recently Eem dik doun in toene removed a sentence in the lead/intro of this Wikipedia article that Derksen is a controversial figure in the Netherlands.... Since J. Derksen is known by now in the Netherlands not as a former football player, nor as a football pundit but as a controversial talk show man.... and the "controversial"-section is rather large..... I think mentioning in the lead that Derksen is controversial is a good thing and a neutral thing.

PS I am not asking this on behalf of Sigrid Kaag 😌
PS2 I still think that joking about sexual abuse is wrong. But this has nothing to do with my above request. I just want a lead that is a good summary of the article. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 14:31, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yulia Romero: And I'm not acting on the behalf of Johan Derksen ;)
"Since J. Derksen is known by now in the Netherlands not as a former football player, nor as a football pundit but as a controversial talk show man...." ==> This is an opinion, not a fact. He is still first and foremost known for being a football pundit (or just a television personality in general since his new show is talking about the latest news).
"and the "controversial"-section is rather large" ==> This is a poor article, partly because it suffers from WP:UNDUE. One of the major contributors to Derksen's page probably had a negative bias towards him (seeing the GA nomination from years ago), so the controversy section is quite large.
"I think mentioning in the lead that Derksen is controversial is a good thing and a neutral thing." ==> I have no problem with that, but only mentioning Derksen as being "controversial" is painting a negative picture of him. He's done lots of good things throughout his career and he's regarded as a hero by some (not by me but I still like him). So more balance is needed. Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 17:56, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Eem dik doun in toene:: Yes, I agree. Changing the lead might make Derksen look as controversial as (par example) Willem Holleeder.... which is not true. (For transparency: I do dislike Derksen's current behaviour.... I hope that this behaviour is temporary, because I like him before he started this current behaviour (maybe he is overworked..., if so I think it would be good for him to do less TV work (😉) (his musical work is more important I think)). — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 11:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yulia Romero Exactly. Derksen has always been someone who speaks his mind (which I like), but I also think that while working for John de Mol, the men and the show have benefited from controversy, with VI being quit and continued multiple times now (resulting in higher TV ratings). The story about the candle was unnecessary and most definitely fake so it was all a bit unneeded. Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 18:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Johan_Derksen&oldid=1206941852"