Talk:Mafikeng

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

This article has previously been nominated to be moved.

Discussions:

Mahikeng → Mafikeng, Moved, 3 December 2021, Talk:Mafikeng#Requested move 3 December 2021
Mafikeng → Mahikeng, Not moved, 7 January 2022, Talk:Mafikeng#Requested move 7 January 2022
Mafikeng → Mahikeng, Not moved, 31 March 2022, Talk:Mafikeng#Requested move 31 March 2022

Colonial mispronunciations

Is it not time to get rid of colonial mispronunciations? Mafikeng and Botswana instead of Mafeking and Bechuana?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.1.193.141 (talk) 06:52, 9 August 2002 (UTC)[reply]

At least the battle should remain Mafeking because that's where we will find all the source material.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.212.146.61 (talk) 06:55, 9 August 2002 (UTC)[reply]

Removed

Removed the following:

"Under
homeland". In 1994
the name was returned to Mafeking."

The town was known as Mafeking during the apartheid era. It is now known as Mafikeng. Mmbatho was a separate town. Tiles 09:05, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Effectively they're now separate sections of the same city. Zaian 20:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Boer and people?

"In all, 212 people were killed during the siege, with over 600 wounded. Boer losses were significantly higher." Perhaps we shouldn't be making a distinction between Boer and people? :-) just a thought.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 57.66.51.165 (talk) 08:32, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably this means that 212 inhabitants were killed, while the Boer losses (the besieging) were higher. Zaian 20:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I think a better term would be 212 "defenders" or "besieged" were killed....

The term "inhabitants" might imply only long-term residents, whereas "defenders" includes long-term residents (mostly civilian) as well as military forces gathered under Baden-Powell.

Cyberfool 25 June 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.105.72.67 (talk) 01:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence currently reads: "In September 1904, Lord Roberts unveiled an obelisk at Mafeking bearing the names of those who fell in defence of the town. British losses during the siege were 212 people killed, soldiers and civilians, and more than 600 wounded. Boer losses were significantly higher."

(1) Spelling of "defence" should be changed to defense?

(2) Where is the cross reference or hyperlink to the obelisk unveiled by Roberts? What is it's name? Who built it? What material was it built from?

(3) Where is the reference for British and ZAR losses? Can we change Boer losses to ZAR losses, as not only "Boers" were involved in that war, and most certainly in that battle, unless you can provide the sources stating that? JanBMRabie (talk) 15:35, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

distances

Why are all the distances in this article given in miles instead of metric? South Africa doesn't use miles (nor have we ever I don't think) Joziboy 14 March 2006, 21:10 (UTC)

Well, to be pedantic, we did, before the metrication which started in 1967. Nonetheless, imperial units are inappropriate for an article on a South African topic, and I have metricated the measurements and cleaned up the introduction a bit. - htonl 21:37, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tswana phonotics

Probably something that people have not considered is that the same barolong call the place Mahikeng. Meaning that in terms of thier phonology the h replaces the f but themeaning is still the same. If anyone is an expert on tswana phonotics please infom why that is the case. For instances people still to date use MAheking instead of the Mafikeng modern western writing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.25.35.187 (talk) 15:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing "(disputed — see talk page)" from article

The above words make the article look unprofessional and if no one objects I will remove them from the article. People are welcome to discuss the dispute (about the spelling of Mafikeng) here. --Roisterer 13:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mahikeng?

Where did Mahikeng come from? It says this was the historic name but the only historic name i'm aware of is Mafeking. By the way when exactly did it get renamed?— Preceding

talk • contribs) 22:15, 7 July 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Untidy article

This article is very untidy with many spelling errors. This needs a major cleenup. --Michaelphillipr (talk) 18:45, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pronounciation

Could somebody please write a short sentence (in the article, not on the discussion page) explaining how the various names are pronounced? Thank you. --212.88.16.205 (talk) 08:11, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

Mahikeng. 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.

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) 11:52, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on

Mahikeng. 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.

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) 02:18, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 December 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. (

talk) 00:32, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

WP:COMMONNAME. BilledMammal (talk) 22:03, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:00, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. -- Eccekevin (talk) 19:19, 10 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 7 January 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Elli (talk | contribs) 00:45, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mafikeng → Mahikeng – Despite claims the old name is still used, I was unable to find any proof of that being true. Previous move request cited the article itself as proof. Wikipedia is not a source that can be used to prove something on Wikipedia. It doesn't make sense. Name was changed in 2010 and reliable sources regularly use the new name.

https://www.news24.com/citypress/news/parliament-fire-zandile-mafe-a-scapegoat-real-perpetrator-still-out-there-suspects-family-20220105

https://ewn.co.za/2021/12/21/nw-disaster-management-teams-deployed-to-areas-affected-by-heavy-rains

https://www.sabcnews.com/sabcnews/former-bophuthatswana-homeland-leaders-son-kwena-mangope-joins-action-sa/

https://www.news24.com/news24/southafrica/news/actionsa-appoints-former-bantustan-leader-mangopes-son-to-head-up-party-in-north-west-20211219

talk) 00:38, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Comment: The previous request also cited and linked to Ngrams. If you had clicked it, you would have seen evidence that the old name is still being used. Not necessarily, on its own, evidence sufficient to carry the decision, but evidence. Largoplazo (talk) 00:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

talk) 02:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

There is no basis for the claim that ngrams are much weaker evidence than reliable but cherry-picked English-language sources.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, per ngrams and this (referenced) quote from the article "Despite this the town's ANC-run local government and most local residents still refer to the town as Mafikeng both informally and formally", as in the above move discussion; the new name has not met the requirements of
WP:MPN to become predominant in common global usage. I'm not sure why we are redoing this move discussion so soon after the previous, but as we are, here are a few news sources (1 2 3) and a few scholarly sources (1 2 3). BilledMammal (talk) 02:57, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
- talk) 04:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  - If you believe the source is unreliable (which I note is a change from your previous position) then you need to explain why, rather than asserting that it is and expecting other editors to disprove your assertion. I would also note that
    WP:RSN would be the correct place for this discussion. BilledMammal (talk) 05:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    - I've already mentioned this to you. I shouldn't have used it earlier and I have said that. No, the onus is not on me. I have stopped using it and I am asking you to prove it. That doesn't address anything besides that one source anyways. My argument stands.
      talk) 05:09, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
      ]
- Support to Mafeking per Toddy1 BilledMammal (talk) 04:54, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose move to Mahikeng, ~~Support move to Mafeking~~ per
WP:COMMONNAME
. Google News searches show that all three versions of the name are about equally common name in recent English-language news stories:

Mafikeng 266 results
Mafeking 258 results But many of these are about places or organisations in other parts of the world, named after the famous siege, and are therefore irrelevant.
Mahikeng 247 results

Ngram data up to 2019 shows that the historical English-language name Mafeking had absolute dominance before 1980, and in the sources looked at in Ngrams has remained more common than Mafikeng since then. I would guess that Mafikeng was the official name when the National Party were in power, ~~but it never became the common name internationally, as evidenced by Mafeking being used in English-language books, etc~~. -- Toddy1 (talk) 00:20, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
amended -- Toddy1 (talk) 22:15, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment. Virtually all of the results for "Mafeking" are either about the Siege of Mafeking during the Boer War, or about places elsewhere in the world that were named after Mafeking at the time of the Boer War (streets and houses in England, villages in Canada and Trinidad, etc.) Hardly any of them refer to the contemporary South African town. - htonl (talk) 09:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are right. Quite a lot of the results for "Mafeking" are either about the Siege of Mafeking during the Second Boer War, or about places elsewhere in the world that were named after Mafeking at the time of the Boer War.-- Toddy1 (talk) 22:15, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per all above and previous RM less than a month ago. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --YoungstownToast (talk) 22:33, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 31 March 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Favonian (talk) 18:18, 14 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mafikeng → Mahikeng – Town has been renamed for over 12 years and reliable sources regularly use the current name.

Welcome to the ghost town of Mahikeng, Mr President - North West residents tell Ramaphosa - Mar 12, 2022

Mbeki the thinker; Dirty Mahikeng; Scorned lovers - 27 Mar 2022

Ramaphosa arrives in Mahikeng for North West imbizo - 12 March 2022

Four ‘dangerous’ inmates escape from Mahikeng prison - 15 Mar 2022

Eskom cuts power in Mahikeng building which houses govt departments due to delays in payments - 19 Mar 2022

Mahikeng: 'A poor and miserable town' - Nov 2021

Thato Molosankwe: Moral crusader of Mahikeng - 26 Sep 2021

Appointment of ‘incompetent’ Mahikeng manager unlawful, court finds - 26 Oct 2021

Special voting underway in Mahikeng - 30 Oct 2022

Total Shutdown of Mahikeng: The people are angry - 30 May 2021

These are a diverse range of sources from multiple news outlets. Dates are included to show consistent and recent usage.

Spekkios (talk) 19:18, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

@Elli, Toddy1, Htonl, Necrothesp, YoungstownToast, Jerm, and Eccekevin: Notify commenters and closers from previous RMs. BilledMammal (talk) 19:07, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, per my argument at #Requested move 7 January 2022 - it's been less than three months since the last request, and nothing has changed. BilledMammal (talk) 07:14, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose simply because this is the third discussion of this in four months (including one discussion that led to its title being reverted to this one) and it's way to soon to get entrenched in this discussion yet again when we just had one in January. (This reflects no bias on my part. I have no stake in whether the city is called, here or elsewhere, Mafikeng, Mafeking, Mahikeng, Maheking, or Denise.) Largoplazo (talk) 11:05, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In response to both of the above comments, it's worth noting that there is
talk) 18:48, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment Closed as "not moved", reopened after
this request. BilledMammal (talk) 18:50, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Yes, there is nothing wrong with that. Only two comments were made and more input would be helpful. Especially considering objections were largely about a
talk) 18:58, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
For clarity, my opposition was based on my arguments in the previous RM, which include
WP:COMMONNAME. BilledMammal (talk) 19:02, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Ngrams only go up to 2019 and I believe you have not adequately controlled for historical events, organizations, other countries, etc that use the previous name. How have you controlled for these elements in your search results/ngrams?
talk) 19:06, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
The location was renamed in 2010, and the issue of other places using the names applies more strongly to Mahikeng, due to the existence of the Mahikeng Local Municipality - at least one of your examples refers to the local municipality, not the city, and there are several others that are ambiguous. BilledMammal (talk) 19:14, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TIMELIMIT is about deletion. As such, it has nothing to do with this process and wasn't the basis for my comment, which was simply: We just had this discussion, twice, and it's unlikely that there has been a tectonic shift in demonstrable usage patterns in that the brief period since then. There's a reason Czech Republic has, for the last couple of years, had a formal one-year moratorium (established by RFC) between such discussion. As for this discussion, perhaps the fact that two people objected, and then it sat a week without further contribution was a sign of exactly the sort of fatigue that such repetitive discussions lead to, and a sign that waiting a while and providing sufficient time for naming in reliable sources to have evolved before delving into this question again is well advised. Largoplazo (talk) 22:28, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
It is unclear how long exactly I should wait before making a move request. I cannot find a guideline that says I need to wait a year between move requests and media continues to use the current name almost exclusively. Does not seem unreasonable to propose a new discussion when I am providing sources that didn't exist during the last move request.

The Czech Republic did not change their name, they created a short form version "Czechia". That is entirely different. The United States didn't change their name to "America", although that is a common short form used. Better examples would be
talk) 22:36, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Oppose per above. YoungstownToast (talk) 19:23, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

‘’’Oppose’’’ per above. Eccekevin (talk) 16:24, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.