Toledo Progressive Party
- ... that the Toledo Progressive Party from southern Belize attended two sessions of the United Nations General Assembly 4th Committee, reportedly sponsored by the Guatemalan government?
Soman (talk) 16:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC).
Article is new enough, long enough, and cited to reliable sources throughout. No copyright violations detected. QPQ has been done. Hook fact is verifiable, but is dreadfully dull. Attending a United Nations session/event isn't particularly surprising or interesting. UN events around the world routinely attract a global audience of diplomats, political leaders, activists, educators, academics, and even on occasion celebrities. This is not unusual in any way, or surprising. It would be like saying scientist goes to science conference, and in this case is literally political party attends committee meeting (which is what politicians and political activists routinely do). We need a different and more interesting hook. Please ping me when a new hook is proposed.4meter4 (talk) 16:32, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
- I think you're missing the bigger picture here. The 4th Committee is the UN Committee on decolonization, which oversaw many of the transfers from European colonial powers to independent states. Belize as of 1977-1978 was still a British colony, that was at stake was whether Belize would remain a colony, become an independent state or be annexed by Guatemala. The fact that the Guatemalan government sponsored a proxy group in southern Belize, to legitimize its territorial claims, is interesting. There could be other ways to phrase the hook, but this is the key factoid of relevance here. --Soman (talk) 10:27, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Soman Sorry about the delayed response. Please ping me when you respond so I know you have replied. In response to your thoughts, I take your point about context. However, the geopolitical context is not at all clear in the hook fact and isn't likely to become clear to a wider audience within a short hook format. If you have to explain the context to get why something is hooky (which you would in this case) than you have failed the WP:DYKINT criteria. This hook is only interesting if one has specialized knowledge about the British colonial empire's activities in South/Central America, the history of Belize and its relationship to Guatemala as well as knowledge about the UN's 4th Committee, and within the specific time period of international politics in 1977-1978. This is way too complicated for the general reader to interpret, and the average person (ie someone like myself) isn't going to connect those dots outside of the article where it can be contextualized. You've got to pick a hook that's interesting and understandable without someone being familiar with the topic area and its context. I'm not seeing how this idea is workable even with modifications, its way too complicated and requires too much background knowledge to be usable. Find something else, because this isn't going to work.4meter4 (talk) 21:37, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
- ALT1 "... that in the years leading up to the independence of Belize, the Guatemalan government sponsored a small party to legitimize its territorial claims?" --Soman (talk) 10:38, 29 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Soman Sorry about the delayed response. Please ping me when you respond so I know you have replied. In response to your thoughts, I take your point about context. However, the geopolitical context is not at all clear in the hook fact and isn't likely to become clear to a wider audience within a short hook format. If you have to explain the context to get why something is hooky (which you would in this case) than you have failed the WP:DYKINT criteria. This hook is only interesting if one has specialized knowledge about the British colonial empire's activities in South/Central America, the history of Belize and its relationship to Guatemala as well as knowledge about the UN's 4th Committee, and within the specific time period of international politics in 1977-1978. This is way too complicated for the general reader to interpret, and the average person (ie someone like myself) isn't going to connect those dots outside of the article where it can be contextualized. You've got to pick a hook that's interesting and understandable without someone being familiar with the topic area and its context. I'm not seeing how this idea is workable even with modifications, its way too complicated and requires too much background knowledge to be usable. Find something else, because this isn't going to work.4meter4 (talk) 21:37, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
You must be logged in to post a comment.