Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William Harper (Rhodesian politician)/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 01:52, 17 May 2016 [1].

William Harper (Rhodesian politician)[edit]

Nominator(s): —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:46, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When looking back on Rhodesian history and the UDI period in particular, it's often assumed that 1965's UDI occurred after circumstances contrived to put the lunatic fringe into government—so it may come as a surprise that Ian Smith was actually the more moderate choice for Prime Minister in 1964. Rhodesia could easily instead have been led by William Harper, a Calcutta-born segregationist who thought Indian independence a folly and wanted to strip black Rhodesians of what little political representation they had. Harper left the Rhodesian Front under something of a cloud in 1968, apparently after being caught having an affair with an MI6 agent, and the rest of his political career essentially amounted to giving indignant quotes to the Rhodesian press every time Smith moved towards any kind of conciliation with the black nationalists. By the time of the Internal Settlement elections of 1979, Harper was settled in South Africa, where he seems to have lived out the rest of his days in obscurity. He died in 2006.

Harper is most notable for his political career in Rhodesia, but it's also worth mentioning here that as a younger man he was one of "The Few" in the Battle of Britain, and was wounded in action after being shot down in a dogfight in which he was greatly outnumbered. I've done my best to cover his RAF service as well as his life as a politician.

This article just received a successful GA review, and I think it is at least close to FA standard. I hope you enjoy it and I look forward to any comments you may have. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:46, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I reviewed this for GA and found very little that needed changing. With those things resolved, it meets the FA criteria. --Coemgenus (talk) 12:43, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the kind words, the review at GAN and your support here, Coemgenus. —  Cliftonian (talk)  13:01, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per commentary below. Comment: I had the opportunity to read this article when it was still being reviewed at GAN, and one of the things which sort of leaped out at me was how detailed the coverage was of Harper's political career, while very little information was offered given the rest of his life from 1979 on. Certainly, he lived to see the end of apartheid and the extent of Zimbabwe's social and economic collapse and it's a little surprising some one this outspoken never offered his opinion publicly on those two issues. Did he farm in South Africa, or like Hilary Squires did he accept another civil service position? Do we have any sources as to what he was doing between 1979 and 2006?

Also, just a minor nitpick about his first cabinet position: the article describes Harper's title as the Minister of "Water Development and Roads". The Southern Rhodesian Roads and Roads Traffic Act of 1936 named the responsible portfolio as "Minister of Roads and Roads Traffic". This was reiterated in the new Roads and Roads Traffic Amendment of 1948. When Winston Field first took office, it was still just "Roads and Roads Traffic". Field probably introduced the responsibility of Irrigation/Water Development to that ministry during his tenure. I believe Harper's final title as head of that ministry would've been "Minister of Irrigation, Roads, and Roads Traffic" per JRT Wood's book So far and no further. --Katangais (talk) 15:15, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Katangais, thanks for this, I'll have a more detailed look later—just regarding the first point, yes, I really couldn't find anything on what happened to him after 1979. I didn't even get a reliable source for his date of death until quite recently. Either he became much less outspoken in later life or the press just lost interest in him, it would appear. If you find anything definitely add it to the article as I agree this is a place the article falls down somewhat, but I have done the best I could. I'll come back to the title of the first Cabinet position later. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  16:27, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again, I've had a look through Wood again and it seems the initial title in 1962 was "Irrigation, Roads and Road Traffic" (p. 122) with the portfolios of Transport and Power added in November 1963; the word "irrigation" was at the same time changed to "water development". I've integrated this into the article. Thanks for catching this. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  06:24, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Having done some more research on Harper, it seems likely that he faded into obscurity after his final political defeat, and historians did indeed lose interest in him. One incident the article does not mention, I believe due to lack of adequate literature coverage - and something I'd very much like to see expounded upon - is the fact that in December 1975 Harper apparently released a report known to the Rhodesian press as the "Harper Memorandum" exposing an apparent Special Branch plot to kidnap prominent black lawyer Edson Sithole and his secretary Miriam Mhlanga, who had disappeared under mysterious circumstances. Despite the fact that one would expect this to be covered in one of the myriad of Rhodesian literature which has mushroomed in the past twenty years, I could find only one source for it. Post-1980 Zimbabwean literature on Edson Sithole is ample, but no reference is made to Harper - likely for political reasons. Clearly nobody else considered him important enough to be worth making considerable mention of this either.
I think the Harper Memorandum deserves a spot in the article, especially if you can find any more sources relating to it. The one I used came from an old back issue of Africa Today on Google Books. --Katangais (talk) 15:52, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've done my best to integrate a bit on that—took a bit of work due to lack of sources but what do you reckon? —  Cliftonian (talk)  18:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good! I've just been through again and couldn't find anything else that needs tweaking. While it's regrettable that no more sources appear to be forthcoming on Harper's retirement years, I think the article provides the best coverage possible with what we have on hand. As far as I'm concerned it would make a solid FAC. --Katangais (talk) 20:19, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much Katangais for the helpful review and for your support. Hope you're well. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  17:52, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Only one comment, in the "Emigration to Rhodesia" section:

  • "retired from the RAF in April 1949, keeping the rank of wing commander,[12] and same year emigrated": "in the same year"?

Aside from that minor point, I agree with Katangais that there could be a little more on the 28-year period he spent in South Africa, but if the sources are not forthcoming on the matter, then there is little we can do about it. An excellent overview of the man, and meets the FA criteria as far as I can see. Cheers –SchroCat (talk) 18:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this Gavin. I think I have fixed the one issue you flagged up—if I do find anything after 1979 I shall of course put it in. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  18:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • File:The_7th_Duke_of_Montrose_in_1967.jpg: the permission statement and the given tag don't match - which is correct? Nikkimaria (talk) 15:15, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is one of selection of photos of the Montrose family uploaded about five years ago by a user called "KooksfromNyabira", who has otherwise no made no contributions to the English Wikipedia or Commons (see here and here). I would say, judging from the focus of all edits on members of the Montrose family and the character of these photos, that KooksfromNyabira is probably a relative uploading family photos. I have erred on the side of caution and simply amended the permission statement, which used to say the image is straight-up public domain, to match the given tag. Hope this helps. Cheers and thanks for this. —  Cliftonian (talk)  18:46, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


SupportLeaning support: I have a number of minor quibbles, and a couple of perhaps slightly more substantial points:

  • Lead: For a relative short (under 3,000w) article, the lead looks rather on the long side
  • Early life: Do we need to spell out "William John"?
  • I personally prefer to put the full name at the start of the article body as I view this as a separate thing from the lead —  Cliftonian (talk)  21:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Second World War:
  • Any reason known as to why he joined the RAF in 1937? Anything known of his post-school activities (he must have left school in or around 1934)?
  • "the next day after the incumbent was shot down" → "the day after the previous incumbent was shot down"
  • "From July 1940 Harper was one of "The Few", the Allied pilots of the Battle of Britain, still flying with No. 17 Squadron." Slight ambiguity in this wording, which would disappear if you re-ordered: "From July 1940, still flying with No. 17 Squadron, Harper was one of "The Few", the Allied pilots of the Battle of Britain."
  • Not sure about "ended up contacting". Just "contacted" would do.
  • Emigration to Rhodesia: "keeping the rank of wing commander" → "with the rank of wing commander"?
  • Dominion Party
  • "He was elected president of the Dominion Party's Southern Rhodesian arm..." This might confuse readers, since it's an indirect reference to the Federation which has thus far only been mentioned in the map caption. You may need a prior sentence of explanation within the main text.
  • I've added two explanatory sentences to the "emigration" section. Hope this helps —  Cliftonian (talk)  21:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarify that Whitehead was the Southern Rhodesian prime minister
  • Rhodesian Front
  • Most readers would, I think, find it helpful if the chronology of events was made a little more specific with a few more details. For example there is a casual reference to "Federal dissolution" without a date or explanation. It would surely be relevant to state that the other two components of the Federation did gain independence when the Federation was dissolved, thus leaving Southern Rhodesia, as they saw it, high and dry.
  • I've added a bit more to explain this a bit more thoroughly, I hope it's a bit better now? —  Cliftonian (talk)  21:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • not sure about the description of Harper as "radical", which term normally applies to ideas or policies which are progressive or at least novel; calling for the introduction of apartheid and the abolition of black representation in parliament seems ultra-reactionary rather than radical.
  • Sorry, misunderstanding on my part; I'd meant it to mean "extreme" in a kind of non-political sense, but on reflection you are of course right and I have rephrased. —  Cliftonian (talk)  21:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • " the office of Deputy Prime Minister (which had been absent since UDI)..." – surely "vacant" rather than absent?
  • Resignation
  • Slightly puzzled by the parenthetic "(presuming it is true)". Is this a suggestion that it might not have been?
  • Well, it probably is, but we don't know. Harper never confirmed it and indeed told the press he'd been kicked out for political reasons. The historian Wood stops short of outright endorsing the account, qualifying it with "if Flower is to be believed". This was my attempt to do something similar. —  Cliftonian (talk)  21:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "more extreme as he really was" → "more extreme than he really was"
  • "exempted himself" – again a slightly strange choice of word. Maybe OK, but still reads a little oddly.
  • United Conservative Party: What happened to the UCP? Did it fight any elections after July 1974?
  • No, it didn't last until the 1977 election. —  Cliftonian (talk)  14:54, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Emigration to South Africa, and death: While accepting that there are no further details relating to Harper's long retirement, I still feel that the section as worded, with no mention of Harper until the last line, needs attention. I suggest a slight rearrangement and modification to the wording, as follows:
"Smith and non-militant nationalists agreed what became the Internal Settlement in March 1978, and in January the following year whites backed the new majority rule constitution by 85% in a national referendum. Multiracial elections were held in April 1979 with the country due to be reconstituted as Zimbabwe Rhodesia afterwards. By this time Harper had already left Rhodesia; the Guardian reported shortly before the elections that Harper was "already settled in South Africa", where he died at the age of 90 on 8 September 2006. Meanwhile, Zimbabwe Rhodesia, with Bishop Abel Muzorewa as Prime Minister, failed to win international acceptance and following the Lancaster House Agreement of December 1979, the UK oversaw a process leading to fresh elections in which the guerrilla leader Robert Mugabe was elected Prime Minister. Britain granted independence to the country as Zimbabwe in April 1980."

Interesting to read about this rebarbative individual. No doubt his years of silence in South Africa were all for the best. Brianboulton (talk) 18:08, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all this Brian, very helpful as always. I have adopted your suggested wording at the end for the most part, with just a couple minor changes—one is that the source doesn't explicitly say where he died, so I've not been able to put that he died in South Africa (though based on non-reliable sources I have seen it seems he probably did). I hope my responses are all to your satisfaction and I'm glad you seem to have enjoyed the article. Thanks again, —  Cliftonian (talk)  21:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure about "enjoyed" – "appalled fascination" might be nearer the mark, and I'm glad he didn't advance further than he did. I'm happy with your responses and have upgraded to full support. (I might quail at the prospect of Boss Lilford or Eugène Terre'Blanche). Brianboulton (talk) 13:12, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much Brian. Lilford I have thought for a while I might do, Terre'Blanche probably not. I have had an idea for quite a while to write one about the Verwoerd assassination, we'll see if I ever get to it. Thanks again, —  Cliftonian (talk)  13:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments -- recusing from coord duties as I can hardly resist another of John's articles on southern African Battle of Britain pilots, especially when they also commanded an RAAF unit (which I wasn't aware of before stopping by here); I'll try to look over the entire article but for now just copyedited the WWII section, and have a couple of comments:

  • "He regained the rank of acting flight lieutenant on 4 July..." -- this reads a bit oddly when we haven't been told how or when he'd lost that rank.
  • "No. 453 Squadron suffered high losses during the Japanese invasion of Malaya in December 1941 and January 1942, and was disbanded in Australia in March 1942." -- yes but unless I missed something this info isn't in that chapter of Gillison, certainly not on that page; I expect you'll find it in a later chapter but if you have trouble let me know and I should be able to locate something.

Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:25, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ian, thanks for taking an interest here. I'm rather pressed for time at the moment so if you could have a look that would be helpful and very much appreciated. In any case I will try to have a look over the weekend. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:04, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I've collated some info/refs that I'll add tonight or tomorrow. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:00, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Okay done that, and also resolved the earlier point about regaining his acting flt lt rank after checking the ref. I know what it's like with long-gestating articles, and I think it'd be useful for you to go through the article to double-check that everything is sourced accurately and avoids close paraphrasing because I did find instances of both in the WWII section, and Noswall found something as well, so I think between us we've done what amounts to a spotcheck of sources that might warrant further action. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:40, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I wrote most of this a long time ago and should really have given it another go-through before this stage with hindsight. As you may have noticed I have already made a few edits along these lines. If you find any more for sure point them out, I will take action myself if I come across any more. Cheers and thanks for all your help here. —  Cliftonian (talk)  15:50, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hi, I have just been perusing over parts of this article. I notice that the following text is supported by this newspaper article but I cannot find where that source supports the italicised parts of the following quote: "Harper re-entered politics in July 1974, when he formed the United Conservative Party (UCP) to oppose the RF in that month's general election. The RF won all 50 white roll seats, denying the UCP any representation in parliament; Harper himself lost decisively in the southern Salisbury constituency of Hatfield. Amid the Bush War, he subsequently reacted with revulsion each time Smith moved towards settlement with black nationalist factions. In December 1974 he described Smith's announcement of a ceasefire in the run-up to the Victoria Falls Conference as a "ghastly capitulation";" Perhaps it is me reading over it, but if not, you need to support the rest of those sentences with reliable sources. Cheers, —Noswall59 (talk) 17:16, 14 April 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Hi Noswall, good thing you point that out—I wrote that section a very long time ago and hadn't bothered reviewing it when I put together for FAC. There was quite a big error there regarding the chronology. The UCP wasn't formed until after that election. Anyway, I've been through and fixed it now. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:04, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Noswall59 and Ian Rose: how do you think it looks now? I've had another run through and I think I've picked up any outstanding issues left over from earlier in the article's gestation. Thanks to you both, especially Ian for running through Gillison to find some page numbers for me. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  06:58, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Cliftonian: Hi, thanks for addressing this. I've been over the paragraphs in question and, where I can see the sources, I do believe the article accurately represents them; this is a success given the obscurity of some of this material and post-1968 Harper. The 1970s–90s can also be so hard to research without trips to major libraries. As a final note, or more of a query, I wonder whether Hatfield should be (red-)linked to Hatfield (Rhodesian constituency) or some similar construction, just because that is what he was actually running for. Due to offline commitments, I can't really find the time at present to review the article further, although I may return to it if things calm down IRL; it nonetheless seems to be a well-written, comprehensive and probably necessary study of this rather detestable figure. Anyway, best of luck with this; regards, —Noswall59 (talk) 22:15, 18 April 2016 (UTC).[reply]
Hi Noswall, thanks for getting back to me. I'm glad it all looks okay now. Re constituencies, I think that might be a bit premature at this stage as the articles for Zim/Rhodesian constituencies don't exist yet, but for sure in the future when they are taken in hand they should be linked as you recommend. I hope all's well and of course real-life commitments come first. Cheers and thanks again —  Cliftonian (talk)  09:27, 19 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tks John, I've had a quick read through the whole article now, very lightly copyedited, and spotchecked FNs 21, 35, 46 and 57. I found one minor thing with the last-mentioned, which I actioned, but feel that only the second sentence cited to FN21 is clearly supported by the source given. I think the first sentence, especially concerning the Wind of Change and "no independence before majority rule", could use another source. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 16:05, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ian, thanks for having another look. I've incorporated another two for the issue you raise from the UDI article. Hope this helps. Cheers, —  Cliftonian (talk)  08:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tks John. I could see it was essentially there for context, uncontroversial, but given this is FA material... Anyway, since that was was my only remaining point I'm happy to support -- well done. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:40, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your help, the kind words and your support Ian. Hope all's well. Cheers —  Cliftonian (talk)  06:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note - Did anyone look over the sources for formatting and such, aside from the spot-check above? --Laser brain (talk) 22:40, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source review -- all links check out, formatting looks okay, saw no cause for concern re. reliability. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:47, 7 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/William_Harper_(Rhodesian_politician)/archive1&oldid=1079644189"