User talk:Napata102
[[User:|User:]] ([[User talk:#top|talk]]) 19:47, 20 August 2018 (UTC) Also please sign your entries thanks DApo
[[User:|User:]] ([[User talk:#top|talk]]) 19:46, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Hello I am a scholar in African history and taught it for many years and find much of your comment disrespectful. Pan Africanism evolved over time so it is necessary to understand both how it was originally and then how it became in modern times. Unless your knowledge of Ancient Egypt is weak you would have recognised that Hyksos were Pheonicians/Mediterranean not Africans. The Egyptian rulers fled to Meroitic Sudan the home of Narmer/Menes who united lower and upper Egypt. I put the references to the Hyksos invasions there! Why did they flee to Sudan? Because they were the same people same civilisation and they considered the Hyksos foreigners. So since 4,000 BC Africans considered themselves part of the same civilisation. The contemporary view which makes Pan Africanism a result of the slave trade is SO insulting to Africans as it accepts the European myth/prejudice that prior to the slave trade Africans did not have a concept of being African or any identity other than tribal...this is so insulting. However as a consequence of the slave trade the idea of continental unity also emerged. This idea was entirely new and arose from the idea that given the fact that 'white/Western' countries were ganging up together against African countries the only chance to preserve our independence is with an equal unity against the foreigners. The entry at present focusses on the slave trade and 'white ' people though pan-Africanism is against all foreign invaders including Arabs who invaded Egypt and most of Northern Africa. As presently written it would appear we have no concern about Arab predators in our past ...this is not so.
Please read the entry on European Union!..there you will see they extensively begin by placing it in history and there is no sound bite provided in a sentence even though the EU is widely known about. So why are you expecting different for Pan Africanism?
I will give you a few days to respond after that I will revert the text. If you keep cancelling without responding to me I will escalate the matter.
Pan Africanism has along history and develops...you should be roud o fthat.
Hello. Thank you for your interest in Pan-Africanism. Please help improve the article by writing the first paragraph so a reader can quickly understand what Pan-Africanism is. (You re-wrote the paragraph to talk about its history instead.)
Also, the other paragraph you re-wrote is a polemic against what Pan-Africanism isn't. Please help by writing what Pan-Africanism is. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:28, 24 June 2011 (UTC) [[User:|User:]] ([[User talk:#top|talk]]) 22:58, 6 August 2018 (UTC) Okay I have now updated the definition of pan africanism in history
Speedy deletion nomination of Dapo ladimeji
[edit]
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Dapo ladimeji requesting that it be speedily deleted from . This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with 's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Drmies (talk) 19:42, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
January 2018
[edit]
Welcome to , and thank you for your contributions. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, please note that there is a Manual of Style that should be followed to maintain a consistent, encyclopedic appearance. Deviating from this style, as you did in Abram Petrovich Gannibal, disturbs uniformity among articles and may cause readability or accessibility problems. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Specifically the section found at WP:WEASEL. JesseRafe (talk) 19:05, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
[[User:|User:]] ([[User talk:#top|talk]]) 00:33, 6 August 2018 (UTC) I am bit lost, the reference was to an article not to my opinion, just that the article claims (with evidence) that Barnes' views of Gannibal were negative. To be frank - Barnes actually says of Gannibal '‘It would be nice to say that Gannibal was a courageous man...The truth is ...he was easily terrified and often a coward’ he later calls him 'deranged',a 'libertine' and a 'plagiarist'. At one point he calls Gannibal a 'monkey' - I kid you not. I am not sure what else one can call this other than a negative view - whether true or false. In my opinion saying that Barnes had a negative view of Gannibal is factual not opinion. He may be right or he may be wrong but those comments are definitely negative. Not so?
Welcome
[edit]
|
Minor versus regular edits
[edit]Hi and welcome again! I wanted to drop you a small note with some information on how to mark your edits--you can read the policy in depth here, or in short, "minor" edits are ones that no one would ever disagree with. Grammatical errors, italicizing a book title if someone forgot, that sort of thing. Otherwise you can and should please just leave them as regular edits. I know it may feels odd, since plenty of edits won't feel "major"! The main difference it makes is that some people filter their watchlists to exclude minor edits, and won't see and have a chance to review any changes marked as "minor", so it's an important point of community trust to only use that designation if you're really not changing any of the meaning of the entry, or otherwise anything anyone else might do differently. Thanks much! Innisfree987 (talk) 21:59, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Managing a conflict of interest
[edit] Hello, . We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on , you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:
- avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
- propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
- disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
- avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
- do your best to comply with 's content policies.
In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).
Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Innisfree987 (talk) 22:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for this.I do not follow the that often so I am a bit behind but not deliberately ignoring you. I have now read a bit more and am a little upset. A few years ago during a campaign for a Trustee position at RSA I was a member of a campaign team that was supporting Dapo Ladimeji. Someone suggested using to assist the campaign. I will dig up her name. Most of us were quite negative about it but she insisted she would do it for free and that she was an expert on . She proposed a very puffy profile and shouted down most of us saying she knew best ... none of us really knew anything about editing. She gave a host of lectures on it. In the end she suddenly charged us for her time!!! I can now see she violated various rules against using profiles for publicity and not revealing she was paid etc When the profile was rejected it seemed on what she had said unreasonable and I think I tried to amend it and tone it down but frankly it violated the code but I did not know. I should have read more about the rules but she said she knew and I was following her template thinking she was an expert!!!! We now suspect she was a plant for one of the competitors to do opposition research on our candidate. Anyway regardless of what she said I have always tried to keep my edits factual and my sense of campaigning for issues and profile arose from what we were told. I have absolutely no wish to break rules
- Thanks so much for your reply, and no worries on timing! We're all volunteers here so you're free to work at your own speed! I understand completely. has a lot of policies that are definitely not obvious from the outside, so don't worry if you don't know something immediately! The links above should give you good information to guide you, and I'll give some more specific thoughts in terms of how conflict of interest affects the Appiah article below.
- One simple thing to know, as far as the Dapo Ladimeji entry, and apologies if I'm not completely understanding what happened, but it looks from here like that entry was posted by this account. If someone else writes an entry, they should post it from their own account rather than yours, as has a firm policy against sharing accounts. Do take care on that front: sharing accounts can lead to being blocked, so I want to make sure you know about that rule!
- Hope that helps! Welcome again and happy editing. Innisfree987 (talk) 20:50, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt response. Her name was Jacquline P....(I think I can't identify people?) and I found her email to the team:
"Herewith the final proof.
It's taken a while to get there because it is a fascinating entry.
The next step is to put it onto Wiki. We can always edit and add once it is placed there. There may also need to be a small maintenance contract to ensure that no-one else adds inaccurate material into the entry. Or you can monitor it yourself.
The student has spent more time than anticipated (actually reading the entries and links to get a flavour of the bigger picture). Would you be willing to increase the stipend to £300?
She could be useful going forward as a resource person to monitor the entry!
best regards, Jacqueline"
She then wrote: "It's been posted! Will now take take a few days to be cleared by Wiki.
I will let you know once its live and we can then discuss a maintenance backup and add on information as needed.
Happy for recommendations from others who may need this as my student will soon be graduating and I hope to offer her a part time position with my company. Doing Wiki entries is enjoyable for her.
The price has to be negotiated with everyone separately but do feel free to recommend us because there are many people who should be profiled but are not.
Best regards, Jacqueline'
I think she suggested that it be put up in my name to do the monitoring (I was chair of the campaign committee), but I can't clearly remember now.
Anyways I was taken - lesson learned!
...
- Not to worry, we understand that people may not realize when they first start editing what the rules are! No further explanation required! If you ever run into a similar situation again, WP:COI will help guide you, and especially WP:PAID.
- And yes please do take care as far as making sure not to post personal details. The relevant policy as far as other editors are concerned is here: Harassment#Posting_of_personal_information and then additionally it's helpful to be mindful that policies on WP:Biographies of living people apply not only to entries themselves, but also to all Talk pages.
- Lastly, a small tip: make sure to sign your posts on talk pages by leaving four of the tilda symbol (~) in a row. This will automatically insert your username and the date and time you left your message, which makes conversations easier for all to follow. Thanks much! Innisfree987 (talk) 02:34, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
TALK: Kwame Anthony Appiah
[edit]Hi I propose putting a citation of an article out of public interest. The article alleges academic failings in scholarship by K A Appiah and is heavily referenced. I know Appiah and the author of the article. I am not stating whether the article is correct or incorrect rather that because the allegations are serious (academic fraud) it should be noted. My proposed wording is: 'Allegation have been made about the integrity of Appiah's scholarship,'
- Hi again! Thanks so much for letting us know the situation. Per the conflict of interest policy, you'll want to take special care with any edits to entries where you have a personal connection to the subject and/or to the author of work you are citing. I know this can be really complicated if you have academic expertise in the relevant field, because your contributions are very valuable to and at the same time, it can be difficult to find entries in your field where the people involved aren't your colleagues! When you do know someone personally, the best thing to do is probably to propose your edit to the entry's talk page and discuss it with other editors who aren't personally connected to the subject.
- For this entry, I recommend you also have a read of the policies on editing WP:Biographies of living people, as the rules for what material can be included are considerably stricter in those entries than they are for the rest of the encyclopedia. This is both out of consideration for the potential impact on real people's lives and the legal issues (libel) for . So allegations of fraud are quite a serious thing to add and have to meet relatively high standards before they can be included. WP:DUEWEIGHT is another policy that will help guide you. But in any case the conversation's better had over at the talk page for the entry, so all interested editors may comment. Thanks much! Innisfree987 (talk) 21:05, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
January 2020
[edit]
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on White supremacy; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
- Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
- Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Bishonen | talk 11:43, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
I am not sure what is going on here. People are reverting my edits without explanation or discussion and then you claim I am the one in an edit war? If they gave an explanation I could answer them. My edits were heavily referenced academically so I expected some explanation for a challenge. If they provide no explanation what can I discuss? Napata102 (talk) 22:56, 22 June 2020 (UTC) also i reverted once ..so please explain what is meant by 'repeatedly changing' when I did it once? Napata102 (talk) 22:58, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Signatures
[edit]Please add your signature at the end of your comments, not the beginning. This will ensure that other people can differentiate you comments from the responses. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 23:22, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
Talk page edits
[edit]I don't know whether it's a brower malfunction or something, but your edits to talk pages this year have all corrupted the pages by removing text seemingly at random, for example here. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:25, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
This has nothing to do with me! Napata102 (talk) 22:09, 19 June 2021 (UTC)