Talk:Equal Education

This article was nominated for deletion on 20 January 2021. The result of the discussion was Draftify.

Equal Education: Past Campaigns was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 11 February 2021 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Equal Education. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Equal Education article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Articles for creation

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted on 6 April 2012 by reviewer WheresTristan (talk · contribs).

South Africa

	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 articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Controversies[edit]

Earlier this year I added the controversy section to capture an important controversy relating to the organisation.Didgeridoo2022 suggested these edits were Disruptive Editing and removed them. I have undone that change: the edits were not disruptive. Other editors already noted that the article reads like an advertisement. I welcome alternative suggestions on how to write the section but it should not be removed. LeagleZA (talk) 20:38, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tenth anniversary importance[edit]

Under the history section, there is a fairly substantial paragraph dedicated to the movement's tenth anniversary. Most of the information that it includes could easily be integrated with other paragraphs, and it reads very much like puffery.

The sentence below that is similarly flawed, in addition to failing MOS:DATED and being two years out of date. Ships & Space_(Edits) 01:18, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]