Talk:Serer history

A story of one editor or a wikipedia article
10 bucks for anyone can tell me why this is in a wikipedia article ""Access Gambia, - an organization that writes anything it wishes without reliable sources or no sources or attributions whatsoever." I would like to use this example to illustrate OR. but it is better for a blog than wikipedia which is a professional space. --Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ (talk) 17:21, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Remove section which is an offtopic, editors OR and NPOV violation
This is the section removed for transparency The principle issue is it is history (POV) with commentary and opinion which seeks to guide the reader through why the world hates Serer people.


 * NPOV violation
 * Original research and Editorializing (riddled with comments from an editor).
 * Seeks to promote Serer people against the world
 * Useless intricate detailed info which fails notability.
 * Contains details about Wolof people which is an offtopic

Anti Serer sentiments
In regards to the Serer people's medieval to 19th century history in resisting Islamization, Klein notes that:
 * "The most important factor dividing the peoples of Senegambia was the differential impact of Islam. In this, the Serer stood out as the one group that had undergone no conversion."
 * "Islam has divided African communities into believers and non believers..."

The Senegambia region which includes Senegal and The Gambia are predominantly Muslim countries, although there is some degree of syncretization of Islam with the African belief system as common in many parts of Africa. As opponents of Islam for nearly a millennia, anti-Serer sentiments are not uncommon. There are several anti Serer sentiments the purpose of which is to deform Serer history. For example the claim that the Fulas drove out the Serers from Futa Toro (formerly Tekrur) in the 19th century and enslaved them; the "Tondyon" dynasty of Takrur that succeeded the Dyaago dynasty of Takrur in the 14th century were Serers and that "Tondyon" in Mandinka means "crowned slave"; the Serers were mixing with the Portuguese in the 15th century and were responsible for mixed people in Senegambia; the Guelowars conquered Sine etc.

(repeated info: Should be in the history section) According to historical sources, the Serers of Tekrur left Tekrur in the eleventh century and the Fulas and Toucouleurs resided there, as such, the Fulas could not have driven out Serers from Futa (previously Tekrur) in the 19th century when the Serers have left almost eight hundred years earlier. In similarity, the Serers could not have set up a Tondyon dynasty in the 14th century when they have already left three hundred years earlier. Alvise Cadamosto, - the 15th century Venetian navigator, slave trader and chronologist give us some insight about his voyages in Senegambia. Some of his accounts are as follows: "Budomel" actually means the "Damel" of Cayor (the King of Cayor) who ruled over the Wolof inhabitants of Cayor. (What does this have to do with the topic?)lvise wanted to trade horses for slaves which was the main income generator for Wolofs at that "point" and Alvise is reported to have sold seven horses and woolen products for 100 Wolof slaves. These Serers are the Serer-Ndut (one of the members of the Serer Group) who resided at that area and refused to submit to the Kings of Cayor. They are renowned warriors who for centuries refused to bow to the Kings of Cayor and have defeated the Kings of Cayor with their armies as Alvise will testify to in his chronicle. Highly feared among the Wolofs of Cayor including the Cayor army itself, they possess a reputation for using poisoned spears and arrows as well as terrorising the Wolofs and Moors of Cayor. Subsequent historians will testify to that fact hence why the Serer-Ndut were never subjugated by the Kings of Cayor but left alone. They are the only group in Cayor who enjoyed their independence and did what they wanted to do without approval from the King. According to Alvise, these Serers differentiated themselves from the Wolof people due to their hatred of slavery and slave trading. Slavery is also forbidden in the Serer religion. As such, when Alvise’s interpreter came off the ship to talk to them, they (the Serer-Ndut) knew exactly what the Wolof and his accompanies wanted and he was killed on the spot. The word "Barbacini" used by Alvise, came from his Wolof interpreter. If he had spoken to the Serers, they would not have used such a term. Although Alvise misspelt and mispronounced the word, the word comes from the Wolof phrase "Bur ba Sine" which means "The King of Sine" who took residence at the Serer Kingdom of Sine. Due to the fact that the Serer-Ndut who resided at the Wolof border refused to submit to the King of Cayor, some groups have used Alvise's commentary literally in reference to the Serer-Ndut of Cayor, by saying the Serer people as a whole didn’t have kings which is factually incorrect. The Serer-Ndut of Cayor refused to bow to the Kings of Cayor, but the Serer people as a whole have Kingdoms and certainly Kings two of which were the Kingdom of Sine and the Kingdom of Saloum and for centuries the Kingdom of Baol. By Alvise distinguishing between the "Sereri" and the "Barbacini", this seems to indicate that he is referring to two different people when in fact, the Kingdom of Sine was a Serer Kingdom where the King of Sine' ("Barbacini"'') took residence. But since he has never set foot in Serer Country, not only was he confused as to what his Wolof interpreters were telling him, but he based his opinions about the Serers mainly from his Wolof interpreters, for whom the Serer Ndut of Cayor brings fear. Although Alvise's chronology provides some insight about Senegambian society in the 15th century, his chronology is full of errors. Commenting on Alvise's entry regarding sand banks in Senegal "which extend about half a mile into the sea", Kerr notes that:
 * Along the Grande Côteat at an anchor point, Alvise called it the "Palma di Budomel.
 * Alvise stated that this "point" has previously been used by the Portuguese traders and dated that trade between the Portuguese and Wolof was established in 1450 – "that was five years before I went on this voyage" Alvise noted. The chronicles of Henrican discoveries by Gomes Eanes de Zurara ended in 1448 and conflict between the Wolof people and the Portuguese were noted. Although it is unknown how peace and trade resumed between the Wolof and Portuguese, in Peter E. Russell's book (Prince Henry 'the Navigator ' : a life. New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 2000. Page 297) he cited a document (f-1489) which demonstrates that Lourenço Dias opened trade again between the Wolof and the Portuguese. Lourenço was of course the same person who participated in the slave raiding of Lançarote de Freitas between 1445 and 1446 and returned between 1448 and 1450.
 * At his time in Wolof Cayor, Alvise got to meet the king of Cayor and stayed with the king’s nephew named "Bisboror" for atleast a month.
 * Accompanied by Usodimare, they decided to sail further south and finally reached the Sine-Saloum delta, which is inhabited by the Serer people whom he called "Sereri" (a term his Wolof interpreter might have used – which means "Serer of …"). In his chronicle, Alvise has nothing good to say about the Serer people. He referred to the Serers on the border as "idolaters of great cruelty." Alvise has never set foot in Serer Country and his opinions about the Serers is mostly coming from his Wolof interpreters. According to Alvise, he was the one who named the Saloum River as "Rio di Barbacini" as it would be become known in European maps. Although Alvise, his Portuguese entourage and slaves they have been carrying from Cayor tried to rest there before moving on, they decided against it when one of his Wolof interpreters got off the ship and tried to make contact with the local Serers and was killed on the spot for daring to bring foreigners into their land. In his chronicle, Alvise described how the Serers people seeing their ship gathered at the beach looking menacing and unwelcoming. As a result, the Portuguese occupants of the ship were ordered not to get off the ship. Instead, they moved the ship further back and ordered no one to come off the ship apart from their Wolof interpreter whom they sent to make contact with the Serer natives to negotiate on their behalf. Their Wolof interpreter was killed by the Serers for his heresy. The occupants of the ship including Alvise himself still didn't dare to come out but headed south to The Gambia.
 * "It is necessary to be cautious with respect to these early voyages, which, having gone through various transcriptions and translations, are liable to numerous errors. In our best charts, this sank bank, intermixed with sunk rocks, extends two miles out to sea…".

Another error made by Alvise is the year Cape Verde was discovered by the Portuguese. According to Alvise, "Cape Verd was so named by the Portuguese, who discovered it about a year before" (i.e. the year before his journey). This is factually inaccurate. In fact, it was discovered in 1446 by Denis Fernandez which was nine years prior to Alvise's entry.
 * "The first contemporary description of the Wolof people came in 1455 with the arrival of the Venetian, Ca da Mosto, followed closely by Portuguese navigators and traders, notably on the Island of Gorée which became infamous for its role in the slave trade with the Americas. The Portuguese intermarried with the local population and a Portuguese Creole language, closely linked to Mandinka evolved."

These early European sources appear to demonstrate that, the Portuguese were not romantically in contact with the Serers but with the Wolofs and others. In the 18 to 19th centuries, among the Wolof population of the coastal areas of Senegal such as Gorée and St-Louis, Burke and Else notes that:
 * "While Omar Tall had been active inland, the Europeans had been busy on the coast. Throughout the 18th century, the French settlements on Gorée and St-Louis grew considerably. As the Portuguese had done before them, French settlers intermarried with the local Wolof, and by the 1790s the majority of the town's populations were of mixed race."

The intermarriages between French traders and Wolof women created a mulatto class in the Saint-Louis area who adopted the French language and mannerism. In his book "Travels in the interior districts of Africa", the 18th century Scottish explore Mungo Park noted that:
 * "The noses of the Jaloffs (Wolofs) are not so much depressed, nor the lips so protuberant, as among the generality of Africans; and although their skin is of the deepest black, they are considered by the white traders, as the most slightly Negroes in this part of the Continent."

According to historians such as Curso, Lovejoy, Klein, etc: Like the early European sources, the 18th  to 19th century sources also appears to indicate that, the Portuguese and French were romantically linked with the Wolof populations and other groups and not with the Serers. They also appear to indicate Wolofs' long participation in the Atlantic Slave Trade and the selling of other Wolof people to the European slave traders. Although slavery is forbidden in Serer religion and culture, some Serer kings and nobles did sold prisoners of war in revenge, but not in huge numbers compared to other groups. François G. Richard notes that:
 * "The Serer of Siin had a very belligerent reputation for attacking and mistreating Europeans, despite the fact that their ruler was a good customer of the Portuguese and tried to protect traders. The Portuguese were aware of the importance of appeasing the local powers. Even if not attacking the Portuguese directly, a hostile ruler could forbid his subjects from selling food to the Europeans."
 * "The Kingdom of Sine remained a modest participant in the Atlantic system, secondary to the larger Wolof, Halpulaar (speakers of the Pulaar language i.e. the Fula people and Toucouleur people) or Mandinka polities surrounding it on all sides... As practices of enslavement intensified among other ethnic groups (i.e. Wolof people, Fula people, Toucouleur people and Mandinka people) during the 18th century, fuelling a lucrative commerce in captives and the rise of internal slavery, the Siin (Sine) may have been demoted to the rank of second player, in so far as the kingdom was never a major supplier of captives."

Klein (1968) and Mbogj (1978) provides a similar account:
 * "In times of peace, the Kingdom of Siin (Sine) more readily supplied grain, cattle and other basic necessities to the French."

The issues are too numerous. But I have made bold the problems. So the editor who wrote them can fix and re-insert.--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ (talk) 17:32, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

The Neutrality tag.
For the record, Halaqah and I have set our differences aside. I hope anyway. The article has been cleaned up to the best of my ability and their opinions taken into account with respect to the sources of courses. I will remove the tag and drop a message to Halaqah's user page. If they decide that there is still a problem with neutrality, they are more than welcome to put back the tag. I would have invited them to go through the article but they have not contributed (going by their contribution history) since January. Tamsier (talk) 21:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

See above: "In Ndiadiane Ndiaye's epic, scholars observed that:"
Note that the 'original performances' mentioned are modern performances, see and. Dougweller (talk) 15:38, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

"More recently however, scholars such as Hopkins and Levtzion"
This at the moment badly titled section on the death of Almoravid leaders says "More recently however, scholars such as Hopkins and Levtzion have pointed out the clear lack of evidence to accompany such speculation" Setting aside the pov wording, Hopkins and Levtizon's work was written in 1981 with a new edition in 2001, the works that the section challenges and says were earlier are dated to 2001 and 2007. Clearly misleading. I haven't examined these closely, but and  might be useful, either here or in a more relevant article. Dougweller (talk) 07:08, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

What does this mean?
"The Serer who have migrated from Tekrur to join their distant Serer relatives created a southward migration for Mandinka migrants." Can anyone clarify and source this? Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 07:28, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Troubang
Although Gravrand reports this as occurring in 1335, this is pretty obviously the battle which took place abut 530 years later. Troubang and Turabang mean annhilation. It is described as a battle between Ñaanco and Guelowar after which the Guelowar (who are Mandinka left Kaabu and Maysa Wali Dione became the first Guelowar king of Sine. If we look at descriptions of the Battle of Kansala, we find:

West Africa: Issues 3412-3424- Snippet view "In the end. they attacked Kansala, the capital, in a great battle known as Tourban Kello (meaning "final battle" in Mandinka). Kansala fell partly because there was internal discontent among the Kaabu leaders. One of them, Mansa Waali Dione". So we have the Mandinka, Waali Dione, a battle with one of the spelling variants of Tourabang.

From the Daily Observer "When it ended, the battle of Kansala, a battle fought between Muslim Fulas and animist Mandinkas ended just as it was predicted by the Nyancho ruler Mansa Janke Wali in "Turubang" which means: total annihilation. The battle ended in the total destruction of Kansala by the Fula and with it the collapse of the Kaabu Empire." Turabang, the Nyancho, Kaabu. Dougweller (talk) 18:42, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Doug--the 14th century dates are still in the article. Did you leave them? on purpose? Drmies (talk) 02:08, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Haven't finished by any means, but I'll look. Dougweller (talk) 06:04, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Where to start. Really, this entire walled garden needs to be torn down and written anew--by someone whose interest is not creating as many articles as possible on the same topic, by someone who knows how to properly cite and what the difference between an encyclopedia and an argumentative essay is, by someone who can be trusted to accurately represent the sources. Drmies (talk) 22:12, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

User:Doug Weller and his POV pushing on Serer and African related article.
I will not give them the satisfaction responding to the above silly comments and personal attacks directed at me by bias and agenda driven editors especially in relation to articles concerning Sub-Saharan Africa and her people. Their attempts to discredit me and my edits is nothing more than agenda driven. If they have they their wish, every single article that addresses civilisations in Sub-Saharan Africa will be deleted, because that goes against their Eurocentric views and POV pushing agenda. My contribution to Wiki on African related articles (not just Serer articles) over the years speaks for themselves, whether you like them or loath them. The views of these Eurocentric POV pushers do not interest me. My life does not revolve around Wikipedia. Moving forward, I opened this section about this User:Doug Weller who has a long history of advancing his agenda driven POV on Serer and African related articles. All you have to do is look at the talk pages of Serer articles and you will see what I mean. This editor, copied and pasted unreliable sources on several Serer articles to advance his POV (see below).


 * According to the historian David Galvan, "The oral historical record, written accounts by early Arab and European explorers, and physical anthropological evidence suggest that the various Serer peoples migrated south from the Fuuta Tooro region (Senegal River valley) beginning around the eleventh century, when Islam first came across the Sahara." Over generations these people, possibly Pulaar speaking herders originally, migrated through Wolof areas and entered the Siin and Saluum river valleys. This lengthy period of Wolof-Serer contact has left us unsure of the origins of shared "terminology, institutions, political structures, and practices." 


 * Professor Étienne Van de Walle gave a slightly later date, writing that "The formation of the Sereer ethnicity goes back to the thirteenth century, when a group came from the Senegal River valley in the north fleeing Islam, and near Niakhar met another group of Mandinka origin, called the Gelwar, who were coming from the southeast (Gravrand 1983). The actual Sereer ethnic group is a mixture of the two groups, and this may explain their complex bilinear kinship system".} 

Eventhough they are quotations, I tagged them as dubious and opinionated. This editor then took the matter to RSN (here is my last response, you can read it for yourself -see: "Are dubious and opinion tags appropriate for these quotes by reliable sources?"). Before I even commented, he reverted my edits. For posterity, I will copy and paste my response to this guy here i.e. why I tagged these articles. He is free to copy and paste or respond here, but below are my response to the issues he raised at RSN :

Response 1


 * It is good etiquette to notify the person under discussion. The person who opened this discussion and I have had several disagreements over the years regarding African and Serer related articles in particular. Following my return to Wiki, I saw the numerous nasty comments he has left on some of the Serer talk pages directing them at me, backed by his Wiki friends some whom have hounded me from this project. I ignored those comments and did not dignify them with a response. I will not comment or pass judgment on another editor's remark about his racial bias, but from my experience dealing with him over the years, I find his edits to be racial motivated when it concerns articles relating to Africa especially Sub-Saharan Africa. Whether that is conscious or unconscious I don't know. I will state it here and will have no problem stating it elsewhere. My life does not revolve around Wikipedia. Because of the hatred he has for me, he has been targetting Serer related articles, which I have been active on, and providing selective sources which not only goes against general consensus, but substantiated no where else by reliable sources. He is merely doing that to advance his own POV, but most importantly to infuriate me. Little does he know that he is not actually infuriating me, he is destroying the Wikipedia project. Forget about the Kingdom of Sine for a minute (which I will come back to and will address wholesale with Serer history and Serer people, because he copied and pasted the same material in all three articles, see Serer history and Serer people), a good example of his POV pushing is the Kingdom of Saloum article. Every reliable source would state that the Kingdom of Saloum was a Serer Kingdom along with the Kingdom of Sine from the medieval period. All one has to do is search for Kingdom of Saloum on Googlebooks and all reliable source would attest that it was a Serer Kingdom. This editor in his wisdom, skipped all those sources and went and select an obscure source (Saine, Abdoulaye (2012). Culture and Customs of Gambia. Greenwood Press. p. 13. ISBN 978-0-313-35910-1) who state that it was a "Serer or Wolof kingdom". There is no argument there are/were Wolof people in Saloum, but as noted by Diange (Diange, Pathé. "Les Royaumes Sérères", Présence Africaines, no. 54. (1965), p. 142-172) and Klein (Klein, Martin A., "Islam and Imperialism in Senegal Sine-Saloum, 1847–1914", Edinburgh University Press (1968), p.7) the Wolof were immigrants to Saloum. Even the Wolof do not consider Saloum as one of their kingdoms. Forget about Serer readers for a minute, but any Wolof reading that would probably laugh and loose all confidence in the reliability of Wikipedia especially if they are doing some academic  research. Yes, I saw that edit too  but I ignored it. He is not scoring points with me, but destroying the project. I will now move to Serer history especially the section under King Njaajan Njie. This editor selected specific sources that talk about the nobility of this King not within a Sub-Saharan African context, but within an Arab context, by saying that this medieval Senegambian King's father was an Almoravid. Note that, anyone who knows the history which this editor doesn't, would know that the Almoravid being referred to is no other than Abu Bakr ibn Umar, as stated in his own article. Every reliable source agrees pretty much that Njaajaan ruled Jolof in the 14th century, which was 300 years after the death of Abu Bakr ibn Umar. This editor was selective quoting trying to advance his own POV and agenda. The earliest written narrative/epic about Njaajaan was recorded by the French governor of Goree in Senegal (in the 1700s) - Alexandre Le Brasseur and reproduced by Jean Boulègue in his book "Le grand Jolof p. 25-6". Apart from the oral tradition, every written record about Ndiadiane (specifically) originated from Alexandre's work because it is the earliest written source specifically about Ndiadiane and the Jolof Empire. I saw the nasty comments and false accusations he left on the Almoravid talk page where he claimed that the original performance I was referring to was Samba's work. See the talkpage of Almoravid dynasty under "See above: "In Ndiadiane Ndiaye's epic, scholars observed that:". That debate between some editors and I all those years ago were put to rest. There was no reason to hound me there as he has done on several articles trying to discredit me. Oh for your, information, I was not referring to Samba, it was Alexandre's work I was referring to when I wrote "original performances." Anyone who knows the subject would have known what I meant. I would rather you ask me than run around making false accusations against me on talk pages. I know the history of my people and the Senegambia region better than an obscure American Wikipedia editor. Please do not try to change our history. Thank you very much. And this is not about OWN. This is about present material in a neutral manner, using reliable and verifiable sources with respect to weight, as stated in Wikipedia policy. Although "fact" may not be one of the principles of Wikipedia, every good editor try to present the facts in the spirit of Wikipedia policy, because without fact, there is no need for an encyclopedia. I would rather all these Serer and African related articles be brought down than spreading false information by an editor known his his racially motivated edits and with a long vendetta against me. Wikipedia articles are highly ranked in Google. Some readers read these articles and believe in what has been written without doing their own work. If POV pushers like this editor are editing articles based on their own biases, it is dangerous to the project. By the way the OP has reverted my edit . If you have an issue with Serer or African related articles being made available on Wikipedia, delete them. It is as simple as that. It is much better to delete them or reduce them to a stubb than putting out there factually dubious claims. I will still sleep at night whether they are on Wikipedia or not. Generally speaking, it is much better to delete articles or reduce them to a stub than to present factual bias, or worst, incorrect material driven by someone's own agenda.


 * Furthermore, Galvan is not qualified to make such a statement. His book is about Serer lamanic custom and land in particular. He has no background on languages African or Serer to make such expansive claims. No reliable source who have studied the subject have ever attested that. The closest we have is that Serer and Pulaar are similar. But to jump from that and say the Serer people who migrated were Pulaar speaking is dubious and Galvan's own opinion which he is neither qualified to make nor is it supported by any reliable source. Galvan should have stuck to Serer land law / inheritance (which is what the book is about) than going outside his remit. Étienne is unreliable, because he has confused the Guelowar dynasty (who arrive in Sine in the 14th century according to all notable and reliable sources) and the Serers of Sine who were already there. To jump from that and say the Serer existed in the 13th century is factually dubious. Note that, he or the editor cite Gravrand but did not state the page number. I have Henry Gravrand's book. Please state the page number and I will look it up. These are the reasons why I tagged them.

He then insisted on the reliability of the sources he cited according to "our criteria" but could not refute my arguments above. Then I responded as follows:

Response 2


 * ''And what criteria would that be? A criteria you invented or a Wikipedia criteria? For a source to be deemed reliable, the author must be qualified in the subject. Further, even authors have to cite reliable sources. Neither of these people you have cited are qualified on the subject or cited references to support the claims you have cherry picked to push your own POV. I will state it again since you have missed it the last time: Galvan's book is about Serer customary land law/ lamanic land inheritance, which he wrote by interviewing some Serers and cited them as primary sources. He went against the remit of his book by making expansive claims which he provided no refs for, not to mention not qualified to make such a claim. He is the first person that I've ever seen made such a claim. There are numerous scholars who are qualified on the subject, well verse in Serer history, languages and culture and have worked extensively with these people for decades but have never made such a claim. To take his claim as fact and insert it in the article under the guise of quotation is nothing more but disingenuous. It is dubious and an unqualified opinion no matter how you frame it. As for your comment on Étienne, I will take it that he did not provide a page number when he cited Henry Gravrand? Therefore, I now take issue with using Étienne for two reasons: 1. In his haste, he mixed up the Guelowars with the Serer who were already living in Sine as you well know since you co-edited the Serer history and Guelowar articles, and cited Alioune Sarr ("Histoire du Sine-Saloum (Sénégal)" Introduction, bibliographie et notes par Charles Becker. 1986-87), a paper you knew about thanks to me because I cited him before. All mainstream reliable sources state that the Guelowars arrived in the Sine in the 14th-century. You knew this yourself because you co-edited some of the Serer articles. To go from there and cite an author who clearly hasn't done his homework properly is disingenuous. He clearly hasn't done his homework because if he had, he would not have made such a silly statement that the Serer are a mixture of Mandinka and only came about in the 13th-century. Even Galvan, the person you cited above made reference to the fact that the Serer were resisting Islamization back in the 11th-century. That fact is well known and record in all mainstream sources. If Étienne has done the leg work, he would have known that rather than make his ridiculous claims which is unscholarly. Of course you were not interested in facts or Wiki policy on neutrality and weight. You were only trying to advance your own agenda. I remember you stating somewhere that the Serer are a recent ethnic group around the 14th century when plenty of sources disagree (here are some sources that may interest you: (1. Chavane, Bruno A., "Villages de l'ancien Tekrour: recherches archéologiques dans la moyenne vallée du fleuve Sénégal", KARTHALA Editions (1985), p. 10, 28, ISBN 9782865371433; 2. Asante, Molefi Kete; Mazama, Ama; "Encyclopedia of African Religion", SAGE Publications (2008), ISBN 9781506317861  - I threw in Molefi there because one of your chums on the Serer talk page I believe kept stating there are no Serer references in Molefi's work. Clearly they did do their homework because it is available on Google books). You then went on copying and pasting unreliable sources everywhere: this and this. For someone who once claimed to be very thorough when it comes to reliable sources. Please! I bet you couldn't believe your luck when you stumbled upon Étienne, or dear I say entered certain keywords on Google search to justify your POV. Sorry, he is not reliable and anyone that claims otherwise is not truly interested in creating an encyclopedia, but an encyclopedia full of bias and factually in accurate material. 2. The other issue I take with Étienne is that, he cited Gravrand but did not provide a page number. You have addressed him as "professor" in some of the Serer articles when you inserted his unreliable material. You inserted the title "professor" solely to give him credibility and advance your POV. A professor/scholar cite his sources in full, not just provide a name of the author and year of publication. That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen. He is not reliable. Neither of them are reliable for the claims you have cherry picked to support your POV. That is the reason why I tagged the article. As for your Martin Luther King claim, don't take me for a full. Not for one minute do I believe you will be made to revert your edits back to my tags even after demolishing your agenda driven unreliable source citations. Therefore, I will be copying and pasting some of what I've stated here to the relevant talk pages.''

This editor has a long history of pushing his Eurocentric POV on Sub-Saharan African /Serer related articles. Since he could not rebuke my argument at RSN, I doubt he could do it here. Therefore, I will not be wasting my time responding to any comment he may have unless he can back up the reason he has cherry picked those sources to advance his POV which goes against any mainstream reliable sources. Unless he offers something new, I will not be wasting my time. All I got from that RSN debate was "I am the Administrator. I can do whatever the hell I like and you can't do nothing about it." Take a look at RSN link above and see how he worded his response, to gather support against me. As he has done on numerous occasions including here. My conscious is clear. I sleep at night very well. And I have a life outside Wikipedia. Thank you. Tamsier (talk) 10:59, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Tamsier, are you going to post this to every Serer article I've edited? Here's my response "Great. I sleep well too. Your arguments at RSN have been refuted, you just don't accept that. You're unhappy that a respected academic didn't give a page number in a reference in a quotation added to an article, but we actually don't require that and to try and guess what page he was referring to would be original research. That you don't believe that I marched with King at Selma is your problem, not mine. If I had a Eurocentric or racist point of view I wouldn't, for instance, have Great Zimbabwe on my watchlist and revert edits by the real racists/Eurocentrics who deny that it was build by Africans. It's a lie to suggest that I want articles on sub-Saharan Africa to be deleted.
 * Everyone edits from one or more povs, there is nothing wrong with that, it's whether we follow NPOV that matters. My pov is basically that of mainstream science, history and archaeology. I'm not sure that you do. Perhaps you can tell me how old you think Serer religion and the Serer people are? My experience with you is that you are unhappy with showing different povs in the articles you've created - as you are doing by claiming that these two academics aren't reliable sources. And that just as you think I've used unreliable sources (although so far no one agrees with you), some of the sources you've tried to use in the past have been shown to fail WP:RS. As for using 'Professor', if someone doesn't have an an article of their it seems reasonable to show in some way who they are and that they aren't just a random source found through a Google search. And since I'm the one who added the Galvan quote about the Serer resisting Islamisation in the 11th century (which I think you agree with despite not liking Galvan) I'm hardly going to argue that they didn't exist before the 14th century. Having said that, if a source meeting WP:RS makes that statement we should probably also use it, suitably attributed. What we shouldn't have is articles that only present one perspective and ignore the rest. Doug Weller (talk) 12:07, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Only to the topics under discussion at RSN, and here is my response:


 * You sleep well! I don't know how but good for you. Here is a response I made earlier on my talk page so I will change some of the wording rather than wasting my time.


 * I made my case succinctly regarding the unreliability of the sources you have cited and for which they were cited. I've said it before and I will say it here. Galvan, may be reliable but only in the context of Serer customary land law and lamanic system (which is what his book was about) because that is his remit i.e his qualification. But he is not qualified to go outside that remit by making expansive claims without first sourcing them from reliable sources. That is the reason why I tagged Galvan's citation. As for Étienne, not only is he not qualified on the subject and went against mainstream sources, but he confused two facts and prescribed his unsubstantiated opinion. First, the Guelowars arrived in Sine in the 14th century, which you well know, but just in case it escaped your memory, see Sarr (as stated in RSN). Second, there were already Serers in Sine, which also knew since you co-edited Serer articles, so for Étienne to come up with that ridiculous notion is unscholarly. Last but not least, Étienne quoted Gravrand for his dubious claims, but only gave the surname of Gravrand and the year of publication of his book (according to your insertions). Even scholars have to quote sources in full when making such claims. I have never seen a scholar quote like Étienne. Never in my life. For that reason I tagged him too. I tagged them for different reasons which are justified. I have stated my point at RSN. Notice that provided nothing in return that rebukes my argument. For someone who once claimed to be very good at selecting sources, I'm surprised you didn't picked that up. As such, I am surprised why RSN didn't ask you to revert your edit or at the very least provided reliable sources that substantiate your claims. I have scoured the internet and the books in my possession trying to find reliable sources that backs up your claim but found absolutely nothing other than the sources you inserted, which means you were cherry picking.


 * You said and I quote : "And since I'm the one who added the Galvan quote about the Serer resisting Islamisation in the 11th century (which I think you agree with despite not liking Galvan) I'm hardly going to argue that they didn't exist before the 14th century."


 * On the matter of resisting Islamization in the 11th-century, because that is in the mainstream sources. There is a huge difference in stating something that is in most mainstream sources and saying something totally new which you are not qualified, not to mention no reliable source to back it up. Again, that is the reason why I tagged Galvan. Serer resisting Islamization in the 11th century is in countless reliable sources. As for your last statement : "I'm hardly going to argue that they didn't exist before the 14th century." But you did countless of times. Remember this Really? Wow! Forget about the 13th, if they were resisting Islamization in the 11th century how could they have existed only in the 11th century, formed a religion, culture, language, etc. all that in the 11th century. Wow you are a genius. Who need reliable sources when we have you? and this and this . I am tired waisting my time here. Perhaps someone else in the future can deal with this editor's POV pushing.  I am done! Tamsier (talk) 15:01, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * You're getting confused. The Galvan quote says ""The oral historical record, written accounts by early Arab and European explorers, and physical anthropological evidence suggest that the various Serer peoples migrated south from the Fuuta Tooro region (Senegal River valley) beginning around the eleventh century," - which clearly means that they existed before the 11th century. I added that quote. One real problem seems to be the lack of recorded history for this period.
 * I've found something more recent. François G Richard has a chapter in Ethnic Ambiguity and the African Past: Materiality, History, and the Shaping of Cultural Identities called "The Very Embodiment of the Black Peasant?’ Archaeology, History, and the Making of the Seereerof Siin (Senegal)". In it he writes that " Oral traditions chart the Seerecr expansion across Senegal and their settlement in the Siin, as they peacefully’ absorbed ‘autochthonous’residents and subsequent waves of Mandinka migrants, resulting in the emergence of a small polity sometime in the mid-14th century (M.-C. Diouf 1996; Gravrand 1981. 1983). In effect, historical sources document the existence of a Seereer kingdom at the time of early Portuguese navigations (Boulegue 1987)." He acknowledges that "Historians of oral traditions have generally accepted the consistency across dliferent myths of origins and linguistic affinities between Siin and Fuuta Tooro to imply that a ‘Seereer' identity had already existed at the time of separation or had crystallized through the process of migration and that recognisably Seereer groups emigrated from northern Senegal around the 11th century and gradually spread south to the Siin and Saalum through different migrations (Becker and Martin 1981)" but continues saying "Yet other signs invite us to pause before postulating the existence of Seereer social consciousness avant la lettre. The most obvious problem is that the current ‘Seereer' denomination and its colonial antecedents do not represent a single ensemble but an amalgamation of seven distinct subgroups whose histories, languages, and social organisations do not always coincide (Galvan 2004: 38, 40)." Copyright limitations mean people will have to read it themselves from the link, but he notes that "At the same time, the facts that considerable cultural differences remain between different Secreer communities and that their political trajectories over the past centuries have taken very different paths demand that we regard scenarios of deep-time Secreer connections critically (sec Richard 2007: 121-24)" and says "A second difficulty stems from the fact that what we call today the Seereer of Siin are not a singular, authentic entity but a historical product shaped bv several centuries of contact between different populations and their political traditions" and refers to " the fact that what we call today the Seereer of Siin are not a singular, authentic entity but a historical product shaped bv several centuries of contact between different populations and their political traditions". I realise this will be unpopular with Tamsier but again, by our criteria if not his, it's a reliable source.
 * I also note that Tamsier says elsewhere"Saine described the Serer as idol (kharem) worshipers. The word kharem is an Arabic word used by Senegambian Muslims to when speaking about those who follow the Traditional African religions. Serers who follow Serer religion would never ever used such a word because it is found offensive. Mainstream scholars use the word pangool which is linked to their religion and ancestors." I think this is part of the problem - he's appears to be saying that mainstream scholars are Serer, almost by definition. If we only used Serer scholars these articles definitely would violate NPOV. I've asked Tamsier when and where he thinks the Sereer originated but he hasn't answered yet. Doug Weller (talk) 13:14, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Effects of Islam
I noticed that the section started with saying that there had been "some converts" to Islam. As this seemed misleading in that during the 20th century most Serer converted to Islam, I've changed that to "most" with a reliable source saying by the 1990s 85% of Serer had converted. There could be other reliable sources with slightly conflicting figures and we could use them for a range if that would improve the article.

I also removed some tags within a quotation as the discussion at RSN didn't support their use or the argument that the author fails WP:RS. I left the tags for King Njaajan Njie's section but tags like that really need specifics on the talk page, so will probably remove them at some point if they aren't explained. Without an explanation it's hard to determine what the problem is (and if there is actually a problem) and thus how to fix the problem. Doug Weller (talk) 14:38, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Even more confused as Tamsier has used Galvan as a source
See.
 * I think it is pretty clear that Tamsier has a master collection of Serer-related citations that he inserts into an article whenever he sees the need to support his POV. 2602:252:D07:7E60:C43E:7ED3:D5E9:F2AC (talk) 20:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Doug Weller (talk) 15:32, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

King Njaajan Njie
The editor who re-edited this section is clearly inserting their own POV and using selective sources to back up their own POV. If anything, his edits also shows a perfect example of lack of subject knowledge. See below:


 * Njaajan Njie (English spelling in Gambia, Ndiandiane Ndiaye or N'Diadian N'Diaye – French spelling in Senegal, or Njaajaan Njaay - in the Serer language, also known as Amudu Bubakar b. 'Umar, is the traditional founder of the Jolof Empire by the Wolof people. Traditional stories of the ancestry of this leader vary. One suggests that he was "the first and only son of a noble and saintly Arab father Abdu Darday and a "Tukuler" woman, Fatamatu Sail." This gives him an Almoravid lineage, ie a Berber and Islamic background, on his father's side, and a link on his mother's side to Takrur. James Searing adds that "In all versions of the myth, Njaajaan Njaay speaks his first words in Pulaar rather than Wolof, emphasizing once again his character as a stranger of noble origins."  Njaajan Njie was the founder of the first Wolof kingdom and claimed by the Wolof as their ancestor.

Hate me if you want, I don't care. But to allow your your personal feelings to cloud your judgment and try to disassociate Njaajaan from his Serer and Toucouleur (Tukuler) connection is unscholarly. But most importantly, it is a distortion of the history of the Senegambia region. And for the editor's information, Amudu Bubakar b. 'Uma / Abdu Darday is the same name used for Abu Bakr ibn Umar in Senegambia. They all mean this person. I know the history of this region and her people better than some sensitive Wikipedia Eurocentric POV pushers who are using Serer articles to wage their war against me. My greatest regret is actually starting as an IP editor all those years ago before finally registering with an account. I should have left them with their Wiki. They have driven out many black and African editors from this project and use their own POV to re-write Black / African related articles based on their own ill informed POV. I will not be making edits to that section but will leave it to future editors interested in revising that section and putting all views including the prevailing oral tradition which seem to be disregard by the editor, not to mention the earliest written epic of Njaajaan by the then French governor of Gorée - Joseph-Alexandre Le Brasseur (1774 - 1777), and reprinted in part in Jean Boulègue, "Le Grand Jolof, (XVIIIe - XVIe Siècle)", (Paris, Edition Façades), Karthala (1987), p. 25-26.

The Arab/Almoravid insertion in Njaajaan's epic is a very recent addition after the Wolof "mass Islamization" in the 19th century. This is what G. Wesley Johnson ("The Emergence of Black Politics in Senegal: The Struggle for Power in the Four Communes, 1900-1920", Stanford University Press (1971) p. 10, ISBN 9780804707831  ) describes as "... greater Islamic legitimacy" see a transcript below:


 * "It is not certain whether Islam penetrated the tiểdo class or the Djolof nobility. A thin veneer of Islam spread by Moorish or Toucouleur marabouts may have covered certain areas of the empire, but Djolof, unlike Tekrour, was basically an animistic state whose traditions were purely African in origin. Recently, a few Wolof genealogist have claimed that Ndiadiane N'Diaye was directly descended from Abu-Bakr Ibn Umar, the Almoravid conqueror of Ghana. However, this seems to be no more than an attempt to claim greater Islamic legitimacy."

The name Njaajaan Njaay, has no meaning in Wolof, this is why one has to go to the Serer language to find the meaning of the name as noted by Professor Cheikh Anta Diop and others below:


 * 1. Diop, Cheikh Anta; Modum, Egbuna P., "Towards the African renaissance: essays in African culture & development, 1946-1960" Karnak House (1996), p. 28, ISBN 9780907015857 :
 * "History teaches us that King N'Diadian N'Diaye of Djoloff, the first King of the Valaf [Wolof], had a Toucoulor mother and an Arab father. But there is evidence of contradiction here. The son of an Arab can hardly bear the totemic name N'Diaye. And it is common knowledge that both the name and surname of this king come from the exclamation "This is N'Diadian N'Diaye" (an expression meaning "calamity" [or extraordinary]) made by a Serer marabout [...]"


 * 2. "Research in African Literatures, Volume 37, Issues 3-4" (contributors: University of Texas at Austin. African and Afro-American Studies and Research Center, University of Texas at Austin. African and Afro-American Research Institute, African Studies Association. African Literature Committee, Modern Language Association of America. African Literatures Seminar, African Literature Association, Modern Language Association of America. African Literatures Division), African and Afro-American Studies and Research Center, University of Texas (at Austin) (2006)), p. 8 :


 * "[...] there are resonances and implications behind the very multilinguality of the original performances. Not only did the performers use words from Sereer, French, Arabic, and Tukulor embedded in the Wolof base text, but they also rendered in Wolof sections of texts that they indicated were derived from Sereer sources. Each usage had implications of social attitudes, Islamic legitimacy, and personal style."

Njaajaan was a 14th century king not an 11th century king. To link him to Abu Bakr is a great distortion of history, because there are 300 years separating the two men.

And for the editor, this is not the one or Samba's work I was referring to when I said "original performances" elsewhere which they have circulated in various talk pages trying to discredit me. It was Le Brasseur's work (the earliest recorded epic specifically about Njaajaan) I was referring to, as I have told them and in fact stated elsewhere couple of years ago. I wish they just came and ask me rather than spreading false accusations against me. The editor in question know himself, so I will not name him. If you don't know, ask.

Unlike some of these Eurocentric POV pushers intend on writing African history based on their own Eurocentric driven agenda, I have no agenda other than to present what the sources say. This is why I can sleep at night knowing that my conscious is clear inspite of the great accusations and character assassination of this lot, which has infiltrated all Serer talk pages. Even some editors I have had disagreements with couple of years ago I have grown to respect as great Wikipedia editors one of them being Halaqah (above). We started on the wrong foot but were both interested in improving African articles, and someone I truly respect as a Wikipedia editor and have told them that on their talk page and elsewhere. Over the years, I have watched many Black / African editors driven out by the Eurocentrics of English Wikipedia. For future editors interested in fixing this section these are some sources. I am sure there are others out there but I will not be touching that section. Tamsier (talk) 08:01, 20 August 2015 (UTC)