User talk:Taharqa

protection
hey how do u go about getting a page protected. I want to get the Mali Empire page protected. There isn't that much in my opinion that can be done to make it any better (no bragging intended...just opinion) and the article seems more likely to go down than improve because of careless edits of uninformed ppl. If Wikipedia has a success story...this is it. I think it might need semi-protection. the article i read on wiki protection policy wasn't that helpful. holla back as soon as you can. i know ur busy. ONE.Scott Free 15:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Thnx bro for the quick reply. knew i could count on uScott Free 18:07, 16 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Just put in the request. thnx for ur help. this is what I put below...

Semi-Protection or full if appropriate - this page has been vandalized over 12 times in the last 6 months. It has a history of being vandalized by unregistered IP addresses. As of late there are also many careless edits being made to the page seriously undermining the progress that has been made in the last year. The article is currently graded GA and it is at risk of going lower if something is not done. ThnkU 4 ur Time.Scott Free 18:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

hope that worksScott Free 18:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Race and ancient Egypt
Taharqa, I am proposing a discussion about Race and ancient Egypt. Please, participate! I believe we can reach a very good compromise if we want.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 07:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Please Taharqa, react to my proposal of creating a new section as a way of resolving the actual conflit. We have to trust each other!--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 08:57, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Taharqa, I saw your messages. About the incriminated article, I tougth that it was enough showing to the man who edited it that his fraud is known to make him change his mind! Now, these people who are introducing non-specialist voices in the article are not realising that the article must quote only notable scholars. To say that the article is afrocentric is just a global criticism. They might find particular point to refute. Your responses are very clear about that. Anyway, ancient Egypt is an African civilisation.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 19:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Taharqa! I will try to quote Cheikh Anta Diop and Basil Davidson from books in the section Alleged Eurocentrism in Egyptology. I hope that this time Zerida and others are not going to mix things in the section Ancient writers.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 13:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

^Yep, I left a message on his page and concur, I feel that the first one was too rushed as more info has piled up after.Taharqa 22:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Taharqa, it is only now that I have noticed your message. Sorry! Yes, that man is very much confused! He ignores the directions of migrations inside Africa. He ignores the formation of the berber people who are a mix, and this is reflected in their languages, of indegenous Africans and invaders speaking Indo-European languages. At this time, the Egyptian civilisation was already in place. And this civilisation started in the south. Northen Egypt was under water at the beginning of the Egyptian Nation. Herodotus speaks of a king of Egypt who peformed deviation of waters to build a city in the north of Egypt. Waset (Thebes), the city of power, is in Upper Egypt. The first nome of Egypt is tA Set = Nubia! This are simple facts. Another thing: What Herodotus said about the Egyptians, "they have black skin and wooly hair", Diodorus of Sicily said it about the Ethiopians, "they have black skin, flat nose and wooly hair" (Bibliothèque historique, livre III, § VIII, 2). Herodotus spoke of the blackness of the Egyptians (Book II, 104). But the same Herodotus used the black to speak about the skin of the Southern Indians and the Ethiopians (Book III, 101). So what? Herodotus is right when he speaks about the Indians and the Ethiopians, and wrong when he speaks about the Egyptians?--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka 22:10, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is that "black" is a very elastic term in older writers. If you read a good history of the Salem Witch Trials, you may discover that the Native Americans were often referred to as "black"; in other words, "black"=people of color! -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  15:18, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Taharqa, the article on the race of the ancient Egyptians is now unprotected. I see that Orange Mike does not understand anything to the race of the Egyptians. He speaks about the color black but he forgets that the Egyptians have also wooly hair! But I agree with him that the word black covers a good range of sub-colors. Even today in Africa, the Blacks go from very black to very light. They are still all Black people. The Egyptians were just Africans and Black people. I am sorry for Orange Mike, he has to learn more and purify his mind about Africa and the indigenous Africans.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 09:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well come back Taharqa! Following Muntuwandi's demand, I added to the article "Race of ancient Egyptians" a section dealing with the relationship between Egypt and Nubia. But it lacks pictures. Can you find one?--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 21:46, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
For the intervention in my behalf and for your support. Very appreciated.--Ramdrake 22:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Kora and Kaabu
add away by all means, bruh! i've been lax on my west african pages and glad some1 is keepin an eye on em. still stompin thru the "heart of darkenss" over here. thnx for the contrib and ur vigilance. btw, how did those articles work out for u? holla back...Scott Free 18:40, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering what happened with that (protection of Mali empire). guess we'll just have to keep up our guardianship, lol. no prob tho. Scott Free 18:43, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I was talking about the articles i sent you (the JSTOR joints). was wondering how those worked out for u.Scott Free 19:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

New Articles
yeah making new articles is pretty easy. u already know most of the edit stuff already. easiest way to start an article is to do a search for it. Assuming the article doesn't alreayd exist, you will be brought to a page with a list of similarly titled articles. At the top, above the list, you will see the subject you looked for in red. click it and you will be brought to a blank page.

start your article from there. Scott Free 19:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Edit summary
This edit summary is inappropriate, Taharqa, as I'm sure you know. Please do not accuse other users of being supportive of websites like Stormfront without very good proof. I hope you'll consider apologizing. Picaroon (t) 20:28, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you. My guiding principle on such controversial articles is to just write about what other people have already said with as few adjectives as possible. Picaroon (t) 21:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Cataracts in Jenne
"How credible would you say this assertion is, is it verifiable, and should I feel confident in incorporating the information into the article (on Djenne)? It is cited here (Link) and also claimed in Ivan Van Sertima's book, "Afrikans in Science". Let me know if you have heard anything about this. Peace.."

Whazup, T. I would never use playahata.com as a source, because it rarely says where it's info is coming from. That doesn't mean they are wrong. Most of their info from what I can tell is legit if only a bit sensational. Van Sertima is not a bad source (he's not the best either). I found an excert from another one of his books where he talks about cataract surgery being done in Jenne. I've provided the link to it on googlebooks below...
 * http://books.google.com/books?id=ea-dgkryq7AC&pg=PA8&lpg=PA8&dq=jenne+cataract+surgery&source=web&ots=GQRjzdwPIU&sig=lbHECCBv_npdvnuE3p0wifbmjHI#PPA8,M1

If and when you include this bit of info (the cataract surgery), you can footnote it as follows

I checked out the website for transaction publishers to see if they were flaky or serious. They are, in my opinion, a publisher of repute and specialize in scholarly work. Eurocentrist are gonna bitch for using Van Sertima as a source, but its better than nothing. It's common knowledge that ancient greeks, egyptians and parts of sub-saharan africa (http://www.healthpages.co.nz/index.php?option=com_mtree&task=viewlink&link_id=70684&Itemid=4) did these kind of procedures. The procedure was called "couching" (http://www.healthline.com/galecontent/extracapsular-cataract-extraction).

Hope that's helped. I strongly urge you to include that data. Just make sure to put it into context. Holla.Scott Free 21:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Not a problem, cousin. Peace..Scott Free 21:47, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Gotta be startin somethin
What's happenin, kinfolk. I just finished to a mini-makeover of the Ashanti Empire page. I'd appreciate it if you could take a quick scan over it when u get the time. Spent a couple hours on it last night moving stuff from my Asanteman article (which is now a redirect to Ashanti Empire) into it. I also took a good bit of stuff from the Ashanti Empire page and moved it the Ashanti page. I think that'll satisfy every 1 for the time being. Thnx for having my back on the discussion board. Holla back after u take a swing thru the page. Holla.Scott Free 16:51, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

No problem..Taharqa 17:06, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Empires
Whassup, bruh. Hope u remembered to where black yesterday. Yo I know u don't wanna be bugged everytime I start a new article, but I got one that I know u wanted to add to ur "Watch" list. I just started a new article called African Empires. And it is exactly what it sounds like. There is a page for list of largest empires, and that kind of served as the inspiration for the article. I can't organize the list by size just yet cuz I only know the sizes of about a handful of states (Fatimid Empire seems to be the largest ever). I've confined the list only to actual empires. That means that the people who ran the state controlled 2 or more peoples distinct from themselves. They also had to be formed by indigenous or permanent residents of the continent. Plus their capital had to be on the contient as well. Despite how advanced or well known some kingdoms were (Dahomey, Ndongo, etc) they don't make the list cuz they were too localized. Just wanted to hip you to the page. Get back at me when u can and keep up all the good work ur doin. Let me know or simply post on the page any empires I forgot. I cut off the list at 1900. Holla.Scott Free 23:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Hey, bro. won't make that mistake again :)  thnks for catchin the kushite empire.  can't believe i forgot that.  take care...Scott Free 23:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Black people
I inserted Arab World because you do not mention the Arab gulf's involvement which was more extreme. I think a lot is pseculation and unwarranted, such as the following- "generally Arabs are fonder of black females." This doesn't sound good to me at all. It degrades black men and the black slaves that were violated against their will by Arab men, as occured in the USA and Europe. However, I left it for your sake. Blair76 02:32, 23 September 2007 (UTC)


 * You should also mention in the article the Blacks in places like Dubai and the Gulf states. There are many black people there and I have yet to see any mention of this. Blair76 02:37, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

whats up?
I know it's been a while, I just wanted to see what's up with you. I happen to be reading some stuff about the African influence on African-American culture. This is my planned reading list:


 * Leroi Jones - Blues People: Negro Music in White America
 * Herskovits - The Myth of the Negro Past
 * Joseph E. Holloway - Africanisms in American Culture
 * Sidney W. Mintz - The Birth of African-American Culture: An Anthropological Perspective

Any comments/suggestions? Peace, --Urthogie 00:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm actually reading Blues People right now and it's really good, but I think he makes some serious errors in his history of slavery and the colonial period in general. Here's an example of one I just found:


 * "First of all, we know that of all the peoples who form the heterogenous yet almost completely homogenous mass that makes up the United States population, Negroes are the only descendants of people who were not happy to come here."


 * What about the indentured servants like huge amounts of Irish, right? I guess the good parts of this book are the unique contributions he offers in regards to the history of black music, even if he does make mistakes on the broader historical context at times...  Did you notice errors like this when you read him?--Urthogie 03:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)


 * heh, I guess that's giving him the benefit of the doubt big time. Then again, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt by reading him despite a lot of his "controversial" comments about Jews. (check out his article :)).  Aside from stuff related to black culture, what other fields are you interested in learning about?--Urthogie 04:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Blaming Jews for their involvement in the slave trade is merely an expression of anti-semitism, not the source of it. I happen to have a book open right now that makes the following statement:

"During the antebellum era, Jews owned fewer slaves than free blacks owned and fewer even than American Indians owned. Most Jewish immigrants arrived in the United States years after slavery had been abolished, and most arrived without enough money to buy a single slave, even had slavery still existed."

The footnotes for this statement are immense:

"See, for example, Saul S. Friedman,/ Jews and the American Slave Trade (New Brunswick, N.J. transaction Publishers, 1998), p. 217; David Brion Davis, In the Image of God: Religion, Moral Values, and Our Heritage of Slavery (New Haven:Yale University Press, 2001), p. 71; Larry Koger, Slaveowners: Free Black Masters in South Carolina, 1790-1860 (Columbia, S.C.: University of South Carolina Press, 1995); David C. Rankin, "The Impact of the Civil War on the Free Colored Community of New Orleans,' Perspectives in American History,Vol. XI (1977-78), pp. 380, 385;Willard B. Gatewood, Aristocrats of Color: The Black Elite, 1880-1920 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990), p. 83; Ira Berlin, Slaves without Masters (New York: Pantheon Books, 1974), pp. 124, 386; Eugene D. Genovese,"The Slave States of North America," Neither Slave Nor Free: The Freedmen of African Descent in the Slave Societies of the New World (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1972), edited by David W. Cohen and Jack P. Greene, pp. 270; Philip D. Morgan, "Black Life in Eighteenth-Century Charleston," Perspectives in American History, New Series,Vol. I (1984), p. 212; Bernard E. Powers,Jr.,Black Charlestonians.A Social History, 1822-1885 (Fayetteville: University of Arkansas Press, 1994), pp. 48-50,72."

If the slave-trade were the issue, then why isn't prejudice directed against Arabs or American-Indians? I think the real source of the anti-semitism in the black community is the fact that, like the Korean shop owners, they have succeeded despite being different from the majority. It's basically a way of saying "we're the true victims", etc...

Anyways, I took this book by Baraka out of the library knowing already that this guy hates white people and Jews...(For more info on his comments, check out the ADL page on him)

I think that it is a great book despite that, because it is regarded as one of the best histories of blues music, and on a larger level, the influence of African culture on African-Americans. So, basically, this guy is pretty racist and an anti-semite to boot, but he's a great writer.

You still didn't answer my question though... aside from black culture what are your main scholarly interests or pursuits?--Urthogie


 * The word anti-Semitic is used not because it refers to Semitic peoples or languages, but because of plain history. The word was invented by Germans who hated Jews, and weren't thinking about Arabs or Ethiopians.  Only in modern times has the confusion arisen where people think it has anything to do with the language group called Semites. If Jews could think up their own word for hatred of Jews we might use something like Anti-Jewish, but it's not our fault that another word has been popularized by other people who hate us. (For more info on the word see its article's etymology section).  Like I said, minor reasons like this have nothing to do with Nation of Islam's antisemitism... it goes deeper than that I think.


 * I'm studying biochemistry, but earlier in college was I was studying journalism. I worked at an internship at the Village Voice this past summer, which was pretty cool.  We made some investigations which revealed some criticizing info about Giuliani.

Also, I forgot to mention that I happen to be taking a class on pre-Colonial Africa in college right now, and so far we've learned about the empire of Mali and read the Sundiata epic. Our teacher actually briefly mentioned the Black Africa controversy and he appears to be ambivalent about the whole thing, while leaning a bit towards your point of view. He says it doesn't really matter though that much because they're all on the same continent, and that the "true negro" thing is a false dichotomy.--Urthogie 14:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Franco-Dahomean Wars
What's good, bruh. I just finished two articles on the Franco-Dahomean Wars. As I'm sure u already know, these articles are about the conflict between the French Third Republic and the Kingdom of Dahomey. Very interesting reading. Peep the articles when u get a second (First Franco-Dahomean War and Second Franco-Dahomean War). i'm pretty proud of these joints. Oh and thnx for ur for on the African Empires page. I still haven't got all the nuances of inline citations down just yet. Take care and keep up the good work! :) Scott Free 13:15, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Black people
Hello! AS you may know I had protected Black people for a maximum of 2 weeks but since the protection, I have seen no further discussion. Was there a consensus reach or simply it was a brief dispute? If there is no continuation of the debate, I will unprotect the article tomorrow night as it has been protected for another issue just last week. Thanks!--JForget 22:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Sounds reasonable. Could you in the meantime restore the second Keita study in the Black people article so we don't have to go through the same ordeal in two articles at the same time? The article could certainly use a break from the debate when there's a separate article about it. — Zerida 07:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, my frustration is probably showing because it's been going on for a while, but Jeeny's constant disruption is not helping either. I've left a response for you on the main article's talk page, and will continue this later. Cheers, — Zerida 08:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Taharqa, I hope you realize it's quite obvious that this edit was yours. I haven't responded to your comments about that study yet, so I left a message for Egyegy as well. I will respond to you later as I mentioned. — Zerida 09:38, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * So I've restored Keita (1992) to the Black people article since you restored Davidson. We need to keep things evenly balanced like we did with Snowden earlier. I've tried to make different changes to that section, and you reverted most of them. I hope we've gone past that now. — Zerida 06:54, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * What? Jeeny's disruption? How come you do not talk to me on MY page, but behind my back? You have an agenda, and I can see it very well. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and had no predudice towards you one bit. But, your behavior is really troubling and your "buddies" too. I know it when I see it. I am a fair person, believe it or not. I can see both sides. But, I will not be on the side of abusers, such as yourself and Energy, lantermix, et. al.Jeeny 07:08, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Taharqa, I changed it to "which was predominant in Abydos until the First dynasty of Egypt." That's more in line with the findings. But I think we should delete "black" in "black or Africoid", since as you know Keita doesn't make such distinctions. I'm glad this is working out otherwise. — Zerida 07:24, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * what would reflect more accurately, grammar-wise is "by first dynasty times". I just saw the change and that works for me too. Thanks, — Zerida 14:20, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Taharqa, on second thought, I looked at it again, and it actually gives the impression that it became predominant by the First Dyansty. Do you see where the confusion lies? This suggests that the Africoid pattern progressively increased from a non-Africoid one, reaching predominance by Dyn. 1. I therefore changed it to "in" to avoid elaborating further, since the rest of the quote is in the footnote. I hope this works. Also, I re-added some of the material back into the main article, but didn't bother with those parts that were not restored since they don't seem to be important to anyone. — Zerida 02:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm disappointed that you are still reverting despite our previous consensus. Here is the version of the article that we agreed to. This part was only deleted after the "Stormfront" edit war, which had nothing to do with it. I guess I should've anticipated that much. — Zerida 04:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Please engage in discussion at Talk:Race and ancient Egypt
I am trying to further discussions on Talk:Race and ancient Egypt and it would be very helpful if you would respond and add input.  Wikidudeman  (talk) 23:09, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: IP
IP has been reblocked. nattan g 07:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

We need you
Please see and sign your name so we can get this article to FA. Can you help a bit? I know you're busy and working on other articles, which is great, but we need you. Jeeny (talk) 05:29, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Oyo Empire
Had to show some love to my Yoruba brothas and sistas (I know so many of them in Texas) and rework this article. I had no idea how great the Oyo Empire was. Truly a bada$$ African empire if there ever was one. I'd like u to add it to your watchlist as i've put a hell of a lot of effort into it. Maybe as much as i did with the Mali Empire page. I'm talking 136 references from my personal library using five different books. I also got permission from Brown University to use a map of the Oyo Empire that had online. I just wish I knew where to get some more images to compliment this baby. Check it out when u can and keep up the good work. Btw, need any new PDFS? I'll be at the library later today. Holla.Scott Free 18:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

You helped choose African American culture as this week's WP:ACID winner
Cheers!!Taharqa 16:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Spelling
Hi,

Thanks for all your good editing work! Please do be careful with spellings, though. On 27th August you edited Marcus Garvey with the edit comment 'spelling'. You altered 'Penetentiary' to 'Penitentiary', which was indeed a spelling error; however, you also changed 'Councillor' (a member of a council) to 'Counselor' (a person who gives advice), and 'reinterred' (buried again) to 'reentered' (entered again). In both cases the original spelling was what was meant.

I notice when I'm typing this that Firefox is indeed telling me that "Councillor" and "reinterred" are misspelled (they should perhaps in US English be 'Councilor' and 're-interred'); but when you correct spellings please make sure that the word you're changing it to has the same meaning as the one you're changing it from!

Thanks, TSP 12:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Hawass comment
Can you E-mail me the full text of the article where Hawass is commenting on King Tut? Thanks.  Wikidudeman  (talk) 13:28, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

3RR on dab
Greetings,

I have struck my comments as the report now is correctly formatted and shows the violation. The admins are really backlogged on this sort of thing and reports that are frivolous (which yours appeared to be initially) only make things worse. My initial comments were not ambiguous as they clearly stated what your report showed. I did a quick check and while there were reverts, there were also other changes. Your modified report clearly shows the issue now. That is what they are looking for. Spryde 16:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Almost blocked
See my messages on Jeeny and Egyegy's pages. You didn't revert as much as those two, so this is only a (hopefully) stern warning instead of a block, but be aware that every time there is an edit war, the number of reverts per participant matters less and less and the number of times they've done it before matters more and more. I've also protected the article. Picaroon (t) 03:31, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Blocked for edit warring. Please refer to this incident report at the ANI. Thanks. -- FayssalF  -  Wiki me up®  04:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Edit warring? In the past 24 hours, I've made 2 (not even 3, let alone 4) reverts, and one edit that had nothing to do with them. Then you decide to implement some 1RR after the fact, when we've been begging for intervention from the start, not to mention the overt bias in letting your fellow admins get away with much worse with out as much as even a warning... Either this is a joke, or merely irresponsible, power hungry administrating. Either way, I do not care and am glad that the page is protected. Undermining Picaroon's discretion in not blocking me (since obviously it was the most sensible action, or non-action given this circumstance) in my opinion indicates that you simply needed to flex some muscle, which is understandable since having such power with merely one mouse click is kind of exhilarating I'd suppose. Though in this case it seems like an overcompensation for the simple fact that this block is ridiculous and baseless. But I'm not going to whine and moan about it, it's just kind of funny.. Thanx anyways Picaroon, and I promise in the future to heed your advice about 3rr not applying in the midst of an edit war. I hope that the 1RR is a rule applicable to that page as I do agree that it would be better than a protect.Taharqa Taharqa 04:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * No 'power hungry' and no 'flexing any muscle' Taharqa. I am glad you agree w/ 1RR. -- FayssalF  -  Wiki me up®  23:49, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Hello there
Greetings! Would you be so kind as to e-mail me when you have a moment? There's something I'd like to discuss with you off-wiki, if possible. Thanks!--Ramdrake 20:10, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Problem Articles
Hey, T! Point me to ur problem articles, I'll see what I can do.Scott Free 13:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Jeeny
Just a small note to let you know that Jeeny is quite ill right now, and I am not sure when she will be returning. Jeffpw 22:59, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If you'd like to discuss this further, please send me an email (mine is activated). Jeffpw 16:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

^Ok, I'll do just that! Thanx..Taharqa 17:01, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

African architecture page caption
Sorry to have changed the caption if it is really a precolonial drawing. Do you have a citation or source? I am still curious what a "pre-colonial drawing" means. That must mean - I presume before 1852, or before 1897?? You see the problem. So is there an actual date for the drawing. Is there an author for the drawing? The style of the drawing does not look nineteenth century, but very typically 1950s. Any way. I think to avoid the problem where fantasy becomes fact, I would prefer more in the fact department.Brosi 00:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much, sorry for the trouble. As you can surely understand, there is a lot of vagueness that one encounters.Brosi 16:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Architecture of Africa article and more
A vandal who is suspected to be a sockpuppet of User:Mariam83 had reverted some of your contributions today. The IP, 71.147.19.201, that person was from has been blocked for 48 hours, but may perhaps return again. Evidently that person really doesn't like you and several other people as well, and may act similarly when the block ends. Just letting you know. John Carter 23:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I do have a tendency toward belligerence. I chose the name for a reason, unfortuantely. And I acknowledge that it would be possible for someone to take the statements out of context. Unfortuantely, you do make such comments fairly regularly. Like I said, I don't really have any qualms about your contributions or editing. You do seem to be the primary active contributor of sourced material for what could be called the, perhaps incorrectly, "Afrocentric" side. Just using that word as an identifier, not to indicate any judgements. And, from what I know of Dbachmann from earlier, I acknowledge he can make mistakes as well. We all can. That doesn't mean that he may not be right in some of his points. I really think that the first priority we should all have is completely and utterly ceasing to comment on anyone we disagree with. The current, probable previously banned user with the IP address, included. Believe me, I have trouble understanding that person in more ways than one. The last thing any of us should do is make any comments about anyone else. This issue is inherently polarizing and sensitive. Right now, however, I think the primary concern might be to determine what the particular article covers, and what, if anything, gets shifted over to other articles. Your contributions of sourced material have been quite valuable, and you appear to be honestly knowledgable about the subject. I think we would all benefit from seeing your input in the current discussion. I just hope all of us can cease from commenting on the persons, rather than the content, me included. John Carter 00:05, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Wolof Empire
whaz good cousin. i just did a huge rewrite of the Wolof Empire page. That page been sufferin for too long. Check it out when u can watch it if u can. Vandals always pop up the moment a page gets better. Holla :) Scott Free 21:17, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

RfC procedure
Hello, an RfC procedure has been opened regarding the behavior of User:Dbachmann, here:. Please feel free to contribute if you wish. ~Jeeny (talk) 23:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Whaz really good...
Whaz good, brotha from another mother :) I just finished an all-nighter on a brand new page called Kingdom of Nri. It's really interesting in my opinion.  Please check it out when u get the chance.  Hope things are well. HOLLA Scott Free (talk) 05:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)


 * 'preciate cousin. and don't worry about the tag. i had a serious heart to heart with the person that put it there. i'll go ahead and put it back so that someone else might clean up the citations a bit for me. and thanks for trying to get at. so what did u think of the article? I'm Igbo on my dad's side, or so the DNA stuff tells me, and I really wanted give back with this article. I was gonna do Onitsha or Aboh, but they all have a problem with considering themselves Igbo and really owe more of their structure to Benin than indigenous (by that i mean Igbo) political thought. I guess i'll get to 'em eventually. Take care of urself. Holla Scott Free (talk) 22:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Tags
Dear Taharqa, I'd like to take the time to explain things a bit, so perhaps you'll have a different view about why I tagged the article, and hopefully you won't consider tags a bad thing. I saw your edit summary, but I personally think that tagging an article doesn't mean someone is lazy. Perhaps you and I see tags differently, but I consider them helpful. Tags are used to put articles into categories for other editors who may specialize in areas, and the editors who place them may be unfamiliar with the subject matter, or they may be unfamiliar with the way to solve the specific issues. Tags have a purpose, they are not an insult, at least I don't think so. I did put the tag, because at the time, it was the middle of the night, and I did not have the time to spend working on the references, but the same books are cited many, many times, and only the page number changed. Additionally, the article was brand new, and I felt that it would be rather rude to go in and immediately change the style of footnotes without discussing it first. If you looked at the talk page, I didn't just "drive by tag" the article, I tagged it, and left a note explaining why it would be helpful to the average reader to have the sources grouped into one ref, with page numbers the only thing needing referenced. I see that you worked on the references, using the "Name" parameter, and then using the name to multiple reference them. Unfortunately, that removes all the page numbers, and it probably isn't the best method. (I thought about doing that initially, but realized that it would remove the specific pages that reference the passages.) In this case, page numbers are vital, and should remain as they are the reference. See here for example of an alternate way to do it, while keeping the page number intact. I actually have not ever used that method, as the majority of the articles I edit have sources from online news reports, not books, so I've never had to use this method of sourcing, and I'm unfamiliar with it. However, it is used in many Featured articles, so I could probably figure it out after a few hours of looking through some articles to understand how they are used. I hope that you do not take this negatively, but we're all a community here, working together to improve articles, and I'd like you to understand that there was nothing wrong with placing a helpful tag that simply suggested an alternate way of doing things, and I felt it was a better thing to discuss it before just making mass changes to someone's brand new article in this case, as the article was excellently done, and cited exceedingly well, but there are easier ways to do page number citations. I do hope you understand, Sincerely, Ariel  ♥  Gold  23:04, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for the kind words. I realize that some tags are done out of spite, during content disputes or what have you, but I have never used them that way, and I try to use tags when an article needs improving, but for whatever reason, I'm not able to do the improvement, whether it is that I'm unfamiliar with the subject, or not an expert on the issues. I do tend to see tags as helpful, perhaps because I use the categories of them to go find articles I enjoy editing. Thanks for understanding, and for helping, your method was actually the method I use 99% of the time, (100% before today, lol) and I really think it is a great way to do refs, but in this case, it didn't work the way Scott needed it to. And hey, I learned something new today while doing it, so isn't that great? [[Image:Face-grin.svg|25px]] Thanks again! Ariel  ♥  Gold  01:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

History of Africa
Thnx so much, bro for jumping in on the History of Africa article. It was in terrible shape. I know it has a long way to go still. I'm looking thru all my resources right now. It's been hell just trying to a scheme for periodization. I think I might have to change it to...


 * Pre-History (x - 500 BC)
 * Iron Age (500 BC - 1250 AD)
 * Medieval (1250 - 1800)
 * Colonial (1800 - 1950)
 * Post-Colonial (1950 - Now)

The beginning of the iron age is a doesy tho. In Niger they were iron smelting in like 1200 BC I think The beginning of iron tech in Nigeria keeps getting put farther back (i think its like 700 BC now instead of the standard 500 BC). And as far as a date of its end, Iron had reached all of Africa by 500 AD. As you know, still LOTS of work to be done. Thnx for handlin business, cousin. ONE Scott Free (talk) 14:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)


 * On second thoughts, maybe this periodization would serve the artilce better. I've also inlcuded some

Hullo Taharqa! Sometimes I like paying you a visit. Prehistoric means before the period the scripts. By 3000 BC, there were already scripts in Kush and Kemet! Maybe better speak of Before Iron Age, Iron Age, etc. Besides, in their book, African Intellectual Heritage, Molefi Kete Asante and Abu S. Abarry of Temple University have a very interesting periodization of African History. They call it An African Chronology. Hotep! --Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 15:19, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Prehistoric Age
 * ???? BC - 6000 BC
 * 6000 BC - 3000 BC (Agricultue to Kemet)
 * 3000 BC - 1500 BC (Kemet to Iron expansion)
 * Iron Age
 * 1500 BC - 500 BC (Early...Iron expansion to Rapid Iron Expansion)
 * 500 BC - 500 AD (Middle...Rapid Iron Expansion to Iron established everywhere)
 * 500 AD - 1000 AD (Late....Iron everywhere to rapid growth of states outside Nile)
 * Medieval Age
 * 1000 AD - 1250 AD (Early...Rapid state growth to Beginning of Golden Age)
 * 1250 AD - 1500 AD (Middle...Golden Age to Modern European Contact)
 * 1500 AD - 1800 AD (Late.....Modern European Contact to European Exploration)
 * Colonial Age
 * 1800 AD - 1900 AD (Early....Euro Exploration to Scramble for Africa)
 * 1900 AD - 1950 AD (Late....Scramble for Africa to Libyan Independence)
 * Post-Colonial Age
 * 1950 AD - 1980 AD (Early...libyan Independence to Zimbabwe Independence)
 * 1980 AD - CURRENT (Late....Zimbabwe Independence to African Union)


 * Definately feel u on that. Yeah my first attempt at working with the article was to just organize it by time (old to current) and in each section by region. I put North Africa first cuz of Kemet. As you pointed out, most of the info on the page was about North Africa so that section got bloated. I had to step back for a second cuz i got overwhelmed. I'm still searching for a scholarly consensus on when the earlier ages began and ended. I refuse to go with 500 BC as the start of the iron age. there's no real reason to use that date other than a couple of publications have alluded to it. But what makes that date so important when iron technology existed way earlier. Niger had itin 2500 BC. It either spread or was developed independently a litte west of that spot (still in niger mind you), which leads me to believe that 1500 BC (the date of the second appearance of iron work in Niger) is about when iron tech started SPREADING. I can't defend 2500 BC as the start of the iron age cuz it was so isolated. most of Africa was working with stone (egypt and i think nubia had bronze). But the uptick in iron usage seems to explode from 1500 BC. Modern Ghana develops iron in 1000 BC. Nigeria has it by 600 BC. Kush is developing it independently in about 600 BC as well. Still, I wonder what to do about the period preceding the iron explosion.

Kemet has glyphs by 3000 BC, but the majority of Africa was completely different. We should be dividing the time by things that affected all or most of Africa not just in the centralized portions.


 * START  - 6000 BC (evolution to agriculture).........NO NAME YET
 * 6000 BC - 1500 BC (agriculture to iron)..............Pre Iron Age?
 * 1500 BC - 1000 AD (iron to medieval).................Iron Age
 * 1000 AD - 1800 AD (medieval to colonization).........Medieval Age
 * 1800 AD - 1950 AD (colonization to decolonization)...Colonial Age
 * 1950 AD - NOW    (decolonization to current)........Post-Colonial Age

that should fix the problem Lusala alluded to. I just need to do a little more digging to back up all the dates. I won't post anything regarding this chronology until I notify u, tho. HOLLA Scott Free (talk) 21:53, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK...Nri
Hey homie great news! The Kingdom of Nri article got selected for the wiki front page "Did You Know" section! I ain't gonna let my head get all big, but man I'm honored. Thnx for ur help on the article. PEACE :) Scott Free (talk) 05:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving
I hope you're having a wonderful day. I am thankful for you and who you are. Thank you! Always, - Jeeny (talk) 22:19, 22 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Happy Thanksgiving, bruh. Yeah this should definately be national apology day in my opinion. glad to hear from u and I hope ur enjoying ur day with fam. I'm full of food and liquor right now and will be passing the hell out shortly, lol. Take care :p Scott Free (talk) 02:13, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom
I have filed a case here, I just listed myself an Dbachmann as the involved parties, because I was unsure how to do it, if you would also like to be listed as an involved party and make a statement, please feel free to add your name and statement. futurebird 19:26, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

thought you might find this interesting
Memoirs of an Arabian Princess in Zanzibar--Urthogie 21:25, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
 * As a sidenote, I ralized that the page is now called race of ancient egyptians. I stopped editing that page because I thought the one thing I accomplished that would last would be taking race out of the title.  Human races don't exist according to modern science.  I feel disheartened by the fact that it's part of the title I again... If you feel that my contributions were worth anything, please push for race to be taken out of the title.  Thanks, --Urthogie 21:38, 1 December 2007 (UTC)


 * that really sucks, because NONE of the scientific articles mention "race", so it goes against basic sense to make the article include that in the title. mark my words on this: the article will never be good so long as it has "race" in the title-- if it ever becomes good, it will go back to being bad again when racists are attracted to the "racially" controversial title.  if possible, i suggest that you get them into an argument about why "race" is in the title, and point out that the title contradicts the sources upon which the article is based, and reflects "race relations" more than Egyptian society and modern genetics.


 * I made a minor typo in the link: http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/ruete/arabian/arabian.html.


 * Best wishes, --Urthogie (talk) 20:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Melanin in AE remains
Thank you Taharqa for the finding. It has to be added to the article on Race of the ancient Egyptians once unprotected! It is crucial. It shows that what Diop wrote has nothing to do with any kind of the subjectivism.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 22:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Taharqa, I liked your recent message. Very powerful. Ancient Egyptians themselves were aware of their Nubian origins. I don't see anthropology contradict this simple fact. Eurocentrism is racism.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 22:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

All Good
Was good, cousin. Good to hear back from u too. Yeah my wiki editing has been kinda off kilter the last couple of months. Starting a new job and trying to get finances in order for the holidays. I was suprised there was no page for the Zulu state and only one for the Zulu people. Considering White folk's fascination with them, you'd think there would already be a page. The speedy deletion thing pissed me off but i didn't let it bother me. People don't understand that sometimes folks work in phases and these articles aren't spontaneous births. That aside, I'm trying to get back on my game.
 * i've catalogued every reliable source I have access to on the Mali Empire and plan to do some tweaking on the article to make it more readable. I put it in word format with all pertinent facts and figures. I can email it to u if u want.
 * gonna get back on the Ethiopian-Adal War page. Right now its a disaster
 * i found some good info on Songhai Empire which I plan on contributing sooner rather than later.
 * Need to finish up the Benin Empire rw
 * Gonna work on the African History page too if my brain doesn't explode

talk to u later, homie. and happy holidays Scott Free (talk) 02:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Some helpful Songhay stuff
Hey homie. I've been going through all my resources on the Mali Empire and have stumbled upon some valuable info that I don't think has been included in the Songhay Empire page. I'll try to catalogue this info as I have with my Mali sources. In the meantime, check these out. I've found the majority of my new info on googlebooks. It's really pretty awesome...
 * Songhay covered some 1.4 million km at its height according to (http://books.google.com/books?id=kdEsWyzLnD8C&pg=PR49&dq=Songhay+Empire,+square+miles&sig=Q0N-FuoDFXErRT4rzlas-om6aDM)
 * Songhay was divided into two realms, the western called kurmina and eastern called Dendi directly governed by the askiya or his relatives. (http://books.google.com/books?id=HwV2a-lPB70C&printsec=frontcover&dq=General+History+of+Africa#PPA82,M1)
 * Around this central realm were tributaries and vassals governed by local leadership which included (Macina, the Hausa states of Kano and Katsina, the kingdom of Agades, and the Tuareg federation of Kel Antassar)

I could have swore I read somewhere that Songhai was divided into five provinces but i'll have to find the source again. I'll keep in touch.Scott Free (talk) 16:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Merry Belated Christmas, homie! Hope everything's goin well with u and urs. I'm in Louisiana with family so kinda cut off from the outside world, lol. Yeah, please add Songhai to the page on the African Empires article. I would've put it on the List of largest empires article but i hadn't had time to figure out how they do their citations. Maybe u could take a look for me. Most of my sources and stuff are at home so i can't do it from here. If my apartment hasn't been robbed, I will get to it when i get home, lol. take care, home. holla at u later :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4shizzal (talk • contribs) 06:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Egyptians
An article that you have been involved in editing, Egyptians, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/Egyptians. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Yo
Good to hear from u again. I've been busy as hell myself. I'm teaching middle school as a full-time sub while working on my certification (lookin forward to doing 8th grade social studies). What happened with Jeeny? Is everything okay? And yeah I'm still working on articles, tho not as much as i'd like. Right now im conentrating on the three Fula states (Denanke, Futa Toro Kingdom and Futa Djallon Kingdom).. Holla back and Go Patriots! One Scott Free (talk) 16:51, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

New info on Egyptians & other articles
Kudos to you for all the hard work you have put in on the Egyptian page. I have just run into some new studies on the topic as well as stuff for any future History of Africa articles. Please hit me up email if you want to discuss. I know you are being stalked by people who desperately want to keep out any valid scholarship that seeks to give a fair and balanced view of certain topics. Thanks. Keep up the good work.Gnarlesbarklay (talk) 06:38, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

New Kingdom Page
Whaz really gritty, cousin. Just wanted to let u know i put up a new page on the Kingdom of Bamum. Pretty interesting stuff. It's not my best work as I've been busy with a lot of other stuff. But it gets the job done. holla back. Scott Free (talk) 19:17, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Asanteman VS Dahomey
Hey whaz good cousin. i know u must be happy to see my man Obama sailing to that nomination. This is truly a historic moment. What I'm really coming by for tho is to let u know about a new article i just put up. History buffs like us always talk about what kingdoms/empires were better. Well I happened across the one major battle between the Asante Union and the Kingdom of Dahomey. It was at the Battle of Atakpamé which took place in what is now Togo. I'll let you read it and find out who won.Scott Free (talk) 15:47, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Are blacks more intelligent?
Article also provides biological evidence highlighting black superiority in athletics:

http://www.africaresource.com/content/view/528/236/

--70.68.179.142 (talk) 23:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Military history of the Mali Empire
Hey cousin. i know ur busy and haven't been able to access wiki as of late. But when u do get back i wanted you to know about the important pages coming up. I just started an article on the Military history of the Mali Empire, and did some re-working on the Sofa (warrior) article. My research on the military of the Mali Empire has really taken off. i just need to put the in-line citations down for the Military history page and that'll be more or less done. Hope ur doing well. Go Obama! Scott Free (talk) 05:47, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey cuz! great to hear from u. career's goin well, just got an interview for a permanent position teaching history! thnx for the props on the articles.  I'll keep in touch.  ONEScott Free (talk) 01:46, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Just Wanna Communicate/ Introduce myself
email me at bloowis@netzero.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.201.42 (talk) 13:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Taharqa, i go by omniposcent -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.201.42 (talk) 10:03, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedian Survey
'''Hello,

My name is Brenton Stewart. I am an African American, doctoral student at the University of Wisconsin- Madison in Library & Information Studies. Currently I am conducting a study on the motivational factors of African American Wikipedians. I am asking for your help by participating in this short online survey which will take take approximately 5 minutes to complete. Please feel free to distribute to other Black Wikipedians. The survey will be available from Tuesday July 1, 2008 until Tuesday August 5, 2008. Thank you so much for your participation.'''

Survey: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=HlzQGQIRUjncj7O09zgy4g_3d_3d e1977 07:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

?
debating what?Scott Free (talk) 01:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

African Empires
Hey T. Yeah I heard of dude. I'll hunt down some info for you ASAP. In the meantime I wanted to let you know about this guy who is screwing with the African Empires page. First he blanked a whole bunch of info, then he changed the title to encompass an entirely different subject (reducing all states to just pre-colonial kingdoms). Obviously he doesn't know what he's doing. I tried being a reasonable and split the pages (African Empires and kingdoms in pre-colonial Africa, but now he's trying to merge em back. Dude is becoming a real pain and I could use some back up. I know you don't have time to police the page, but if you could voice your concern on the merge discussion I'd appreciate it. HollaScott Free (talk) 18:42, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Alert- certain users are attempting to delete a scholar you referenced on a recent page by stealth- Dr. S.O.Y Keita
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Shomarka_Keita This notice is for your information. Zarahan10 (talk) 06:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Dear Taharqa, From your contributions I see that you have been around on Wikipedia for a while and you seem to know several of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I am surprised therefore that you have now already twice removed an AfD tag from the Shomarka Keita article (I have no clue what Zarahan10 means with "stealth", there's nothing secret or mysterious about AfD. The tags are not "weird" and if you are curious about the motivation, all yu have to do is read the AfD debate. Tagging an article for AfD is not considered vandalism as you seem to think, but removing AfD tags is certainly considered a serious form of vandalism and can get you blocked from editing Wikipedia. Aparently you disagree with the possible deletion of htis article. The way to prevent that is not by removing the AfD tag, but by participating in the debate and providing arguments and sources for why you feel that Keito is notable and th article should be kept.

I hope this clarifies things and that you will not remove AfD tags again. Happy editing! --Crusio (talk) 13:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Malawi
Hi Taharqa, in case you hadn't noticed it Malawi is currently being reviewed at FAC. Remembering your interest in Africa I wondered if you had any sources that would help us get this article onto the main page?  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  14:18, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Greetings.
I'm terrible at remembering names of contributors, but I don't remember having interacted with you before. Still, I note your interest in the subject of Egyptology and thought I'd drop by. Like you, I haven't been very active on this site for the last several months -- probably, at least in part, for some of the same reasons you haven't.

But I noticed from my watch list that certain editors were proposing to close out the discussion on ethnicity/"race" at the Great Sphinx of Giza and Tutankhamun. I registered a one-word objection at the sphinx talk page and have been commenting on the talk page at Tut. It's nothing I haven't written before, and fat lotta good it'll do -- but, still, your knowledgeable voice would be welcome and, perhaps, useful should you care to become involved.

Blessings and good things in this new year, my brother. Peace. deeceevoice (talk) 16:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, yeah. BTW, what do you think about Will Smith being cast to play your namesake? I think it sux. Just like Hollywood picking The Rock to play The Scorpion King. And I hear Vin Diesel has been picked to play Hannibal. I mean just day-um! More whitewashing! Disgusting! If I had to choose? Dunno. Don Cheadle, maybe? Better yet, I think, Djaimon Hounsou. deeceevoice (talk) 16:00, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey Bruh
Good to hear from u again! Yeah I've been in and out as of late on my edits. Just short of time. I'm teaching 4th grade history and science this year. the kids don't let me sleep, lol. Now that u r back on, please peep my recent projects

1. Military history of the Mali Empire...I've added a lot since we last spoke. Not done entirely, but nearly there.

2. Kingdom of Kush...this is a work in progress. I'm obviously building on other's work, but I hope to bring it up to par with some of the other pages. Kush is the sh!t. They gotta be the longest dynasty/centralized state in history. They fought Ancient Egyptians, Assyrians, Macedonian Greeks and Romans without as much as a break in continuity. They are definately slept on.

3. Aksumite Empire...I haven't added a whole bunch, but they are definately on my radar.

as far as your edits, i could have been mistaken on my timbuktu edit. i doubt it, but if i didn't source it replace it. i trust ur judgement. regarding musa, i'm not suprised. i've seen his name written as Kango also. i feel ur frustration regarding teh manden charter. i just had to break it down to someone on the mali talk page two days ago. hit me back when u can Scott Free (talk) 03:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

nubia
I don't want to have an edit war with you, It's senseless I care about that article and I don't understand why you would remove information about it being one of the earliest black african cilvlizations, a picture of a nubian artifact and other sources.TruHeir (talk) 02:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I see….. well the topic of race is a very “touchy” subject. I agree with you I don’t think the ancient people labeled themselves with “black” or “white”. The thing is we (as in modern society) tend to use these socio-political labels to describe ourselves and often times apply to history when we try to determine who lived were and who did what. Personally I think it should be mentioned in the article because many times African history is “changed” and contributions made by “blacks” are accredited to someone else’s. They played a very vital role in African history so naturally now they are on the list of not being "black" TruHeir (talk) 03:34, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't mean to sound like an "afro-centric" thats not the case I'm just stating the truth TruHeir (talk) 03:40, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

The Nubians were not ethnically different from the early Egyptians, because plain and simple they were the same people who spread throughout the land and created two similar but different civilizations. The reason why there would be an objection to the other is no mystery. “Western civilization traces its roots there so it cannot be credited to “blacks”. The people 20th century scientific-racism defined as sub human creatures. This gave birth to the new trend in nubian history, since it has been proven that they were not different. Now The Nubians cannot be “allowed” to be considered “black” either. The last claim I heard was about the being an Asiatic race that came to settle in Africa (WHAT?????). This is why I think the article should reflect the truth also I agree that certain parts might have been badly written but I think there was a lot of use full information there like the picture of the artifact that was not hurting the articleTruHeir (talk) 04:06, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

I understand where you are coming from as well......I didn't revert it back, I kept your edits and just added the pictures and a few other things. It's sad that the identity of the early Egyptians is disputed but at least some scholars are saying that there was a "black presence" in the old kingdom I guess that’s a start :-) ......anyway I'm glad we had this discs. as well.TruHeir (talk) 05:03, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Ancient Egypt Race Controversy
Thanks for the "warning", but actually I haven't broken the 3RR- correcting poor wording and worse scholarship doesn't count as reverting, and repairing vandalism even less so.

If you really want to be reasonable, then please consider all the evidence that says that skull measurements can't reliably indicate race. Pointing out that the conclusions of 19th century scholars are not currently accepted does not invalidate their ability to measure skulls and identify dolichocephalism. The use of skull shapes to determine race is as obsolete as classifying humans into 19th century categories, and we don't actually have to wait for the Great Keita to admit this before the rest of us can move on.Wdford (talk) 17:17, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Panehesy
My motivation for the edits of the DNA section are to indicate how useless it is to use DNA as an indicator of a person's race. DNA was not used to determine the race of people over the past 500 years, nor the past 5000 years, yet we have racial categories that we have stuck to. It makes no sense to rely on genetic lineage in such a manner as to pre-empt the phenotype itself. Black Americans whose phenotypes widely vary (and whose DNA widely varies) are linked by common ancestry and their cultural and social connection to each other. Like the Egyptians. Black people all over the world include others with varying ancestral lineages outside of their own as long as they integrate into their greater social, cultural, and ancestral heritage... just like the Egyptians. Do you see? Finally, black people have existed outside of Africa throughout history and pre-history and as long as we use DNA based on a regional affiliation and ignore the more important cultural and phenotype, we will argue against people who have successfully categorized ANY eursian influence on the Egyptians as (non-black). And since many Afrocentricists themselves agree with that assumption, it is they who sabotage the notion that Egyptians are black, because they find Eurasian influences to be a detriment to that (ignoring the fact that many Eurasians, despite having genetic differences, share phenotype similarities to other black people). So that is whY I can't even comment on your quote by underhill. PN2 transitions, Y chormonsome markers, and haplogroups do not tell me what these peoples looked like. They could have genetic similarities but look nothing like black people. They could have genetic differenes but look just like black people. I understand that phenotypically variant African populations exist and remain black, but you have to understand that geographically variant black people exist even outside of Africa. Egypt is viewed by the Eurocentricists as a non-African civilization that just physically "coiencidentally" lives in Africa. Until you can show how genetic variation of black people can work outside of Africa in the old world, in history, you will fight a never ending torrent of assumed "not-black" influences into Egypt. I agree that race is a straw man, but then the question is, what are you using DNA to determine? The "race" or the "phenotype"? A mixed black family is still black. Since when has a mixed black family become Caucasoid? Will a more phenotypically black black person with DNA thats more Caucasian be less black than a bi-racial person who looks very European looking? No. --Panehesy (talk) 18:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Africanity is just a nice way of saying 'black'. And there are those who regard black as "strictly within the confines of Africa over the past 10K years." Thats' on both sides of the debate by the way. But this does not address the issue about DNA. How does DNA relate to how we racially classify the Egyptians. Since it wasn't 30 years of DNA, what then does it offer that clarifies what was understood before it. My whole point is that DNA is a straw man period, especially when we are looking at phenotype. In a nutshell, if I find an Ancient Egyptian mummy whose DNA is so Asian, and so non-African that the DNA would totally refute you, but the mummy was reconstructed in such a way that the representation would show the blackest negroid African.... what would you do? And the other way around, if the DNA was in your mind 100% African, but the phenotype was so white looking you couldn't even agree he looked black, what would you do then? With Egypt we are certainly running into that as we have Egyptian families who has one parent looking "Asiatic" another looking "Nubian" a third looking like an "intermediate" and so on. DNA isn't going to help other than to remind all that there definitely IS Black influences. But since the Eurocentric side has come along with this notion that an overwhelming predominance is required (contrdicting themselves), why are we trying to argue along that? The average black person in New York City city is probably less Negroid in their DNA than the ancient Egyptians. --Panehesy (talk) 19:23, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Vai
Yeah I took offense at what the article was suggesting (that basically the cherokee invented vai), so I did some digging. Turns out the dude that is supposedly credited with the cherokee portion of influence was an Americo-Liberian. I just wanted to point that out. I don't know much about Vai. I also discovered that Vai can probably be traced to ancient glyphs in west africa likely connected with the Mande (suprise suprise). Good to hear from u again. Take it easy.Scott Free (talk) 19:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Ancient Egyptian race controversy
I'm sorry if you are fraustrated take it easy and don't take things so hard lets work together to improve the article but lets not use WP:original research to advance you're positions you do know this is'nt Taharqapedia its called Wikipedia and p.s my brother keep my Homegirl Jenna Haze out of this thats my dirty little secret......Peace Out Yo--Wikiscribe (talk) 00:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * See a major issue that has gone on in this article and is continueing to go on right now is people interjecting there personal feelings/opinions to the upmost degree on the acutal race of the ancient egyptians on the talkpage and using the talk page for therapuetic purposes in which User:wapondaponda just warned people about also i'm hardly a wikisaint myself--Wikiscribe (talk) 15:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Please, have a look to Ancient Egyptian race controversy. The article has been radically changed by User:Dbachmann and friends--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 12:09, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Brother! Are you sleeping? Wake up Taharqa! I guess you are very busy.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 21:28, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

hi
Hello I think you might be interested in this "discussion"[[[Special:Contributions/69.126.251.101|69.126.251.101] (talk) 02:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Battle of Dongola
Check these out when u get the chance. Scott Free (talk) 06:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
 * First Battle of Dongola
 * Second Battle of Dongola

African admixture
There is a debate on the article Sub-Saharan DNA admixture in Europe regarding the presence of haplogroup E3b in Europe. Some editors are arguing that E3b does not constitute "African admixture" even though it is known to have originated in East Africa. Seeing that you are interested in African history, if you have any free time, your comments would be appreciated. In the government (talk) 01:39, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

ANI notice
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--Caspian blue 03:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey
Long time no holla. Just wanted to update u on some stuff I just finished. Gonna take a break now.


 * Battle of Jenne...what the battle of tondibi was to Songhai
 * Military history of the Mali Empire...Now it's REALLY done

Request for clarification
Please, go to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification.--Lusala lu ne Nkuka Luka (talk) 14:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk page vandalism
Just to say there has been some particularly sick racist vandalism of articles and talk pages going on the past few days, and you were a victim. I and other editors have been dealing with it -- it's obviously one person using sockpuppets and IPs. If you get hit again I'll probably protect your page for a few days. Dougweller (talk) 10:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

would love your collaboration
www.afropedea.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.186.48.62 (talk) 02:54, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Great Zimbabwe (and the Lemba)
Hello Taharqa ... I noticed your recent addition regarding Peter Tyson's views. However, it is perhaps relevant to point out - see my http://www.dlmcn.com/histcorr.html#Nw - the fact that he did not offer a convincing defence of the way he minimized the possibility of a Semitic connection. My e-mail, if you prefer to make contact that way, is DLMcN@yahoo.com Regards, DLMcN (talk) 03:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC) DLMcN (talk) 21:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:38, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Contests
User:Dr. Blofeld has created WikiProject Africa/Contests. The idea is to run a series of contests/editathons focusing on each region of Africa. He has spoken to Wikimedia about it and $1000-1500 is possible for prize money. As someone who has previously expressed interest in African topics, would you be interested in contributing to one or assisting draw up core article/missing article lists? He says he's thinking of North Africa for an inaugural one in October. If interested please sign up in the participants section of the Contest page, thanks.♦ -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Invite to the African Destubathon
Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most geography, wildlife and women articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing, whether it's a river in Malawi, a Nigerian footballer, or a South African civil rights activist, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. For those of you who signed up to the North African contest, that will hopefully be held in the new year. Thanks. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:11, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!

Join the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Proposed deletion of File:Djoser6.jpg


The file File:Djoser6.jpg has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Invalid PD-art, this is not a 2D work."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dylsss(talk contribs) 00:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Months of African Cinema Global Contest!
Ýou can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

The Months of African Cinema Contest Continues in November!
You can opt-out of this annual reminder from The Afrocine Project by removing your username from this list

Proposed deletion of Modibo Mohammed Al Kaburi


The article Modibo Mohammed Al Kaburi has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Non-notable scholar, no real claim to notability. Can't find any reliable sources on this person (in English at least). Other than confirming his existence the only sources are he made a curriculum which isn't particular notable. Fails WP:SCHOLAR"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

''' This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. ''' Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 10 January 2023 (UTC)