Talk:Dipuo Peters

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Uhm, Actually in topic Unsubstantiated information in article

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dipuo Peters. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 15:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Unsubstantiated information in article edit

Consider the section:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipuo_Peters#Controversy_and_e-tolling_in_Gauteng

There are no citations for any of the statements in the paragraph and the statement "Dipuo Peters, in conjunction with other alleged beneficiaries of SANRAL's urban tolling project" in particular creates the impression that Dipuo Peters is the subject of allegations of some kind.

Dipuo Peters can not be a beneficiary of SANRAL's urban tolling project, unless there are allegations of corruption, of which there is no evidence provided. "Other" beneficiaries require clarification. "Alleged beneficiaries" requires clarification, as it implies "allegations of being a beneficiary", of which there is no evidence provided.

This statement: "Despite the financial burden already imposed on Gauteng residents due to significant electricity tariff hikes, load-shedding, the national fuel levy, and income tax hikes" appears to be editorial commentary by the writer. No citations have been provided, in particular relating to the connection between these financial burdens on the population and the statement "the minister has unveiled plans to classify the non-payment of toll levies as an AARTO infringement." The latter statement requires a citation. Also, Dipuo Peters is no longer the minister and should not be cited in a way that gives that impression. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uhm, Actually (talkcontribs) 07:11, 3 September 2020 (UTC)Reply