Template talk:Did you know/Eugenics in Singapore

Eugenics in Singapore

 * ... that Singapore paid uneducated women to get sterilised as part of its Stop at Two campaign?


 * Comment: self-nom

Created by La goutte de pluie (talk). Self nom at 22:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC) Please add a comment and signature (or just a signature if endorsing) after each aspect you have reviewed:

Hook
 * Length, format, content rules – Nice and punchy. Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Source – Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Interest – That was the free-market way to do eugenics, apparently. Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Image suitability, if applicable – N/A
 * ALT hooks, if proposed –

Article
 * Length – Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Vintage – Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sourcing (V, RS, BLP) – All the entries in the list probably need a separate footnote, and some of the multiply-cited passages seem to be referring to different portions of the material supported by their footnotes. Check out the suggestions at WP:CITEKILL for how you can make clearer what's supporting what. Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Neutrality – OK given a potentially contentious subject. Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Plagiarism/close paraphrasing – None apparent; good job when a lesser editor might have just copypasted from this source.
 * copyvio (files) – I could quarrel, perhaps, with whether the poster is truly justified under NFCC 8 since it's not mentioned specifically in the article. But I'll leave that for another forum. Otherwise it's justified properly. Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm about to add details about the campaign, including the extensive interventionism involved. elle vécut heureuse  à jamais  (be free) 17:49, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

I think that maybe Lee Kuan Yew's views should be dispersed throughout the article to the appropriate time frame. I am aware that they are important in this context, but I think corralling them into a section may be a little undue. Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Obvious faults in prose, structure, formatting –

Comments/discussion:
 * Hold on -- do I need to a new footnote for every single point on that list, especially since there are many items, many of which would be taken from the same set of sources? Wouldn't this push citekill to the extreme? Anyway thanks for reviewing! I'm in the process of adding new references as well. I've integrated LKY's views into the rest of the article. elle vécut heureuse  à jamais  (be free) 17:49, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Article has since been massively updated. Requesting review. elle vécut heureuse  à jamais  (be free) 22:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Alright, looks better now. Daniel Case (talk) 04:28, 25 August 2011 (UTC)