User talk:Vansertima

June 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ''I note that you have removed cited content and replaced it by copying the text from. '' Dougweller (talk) 07:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Ivan Van Sertima

 * Hi LaCheun, just responding to your message at my talk page. I should like to offer condolescences for your recent loss. Thanks for the tip regarding the orthography of his surname. His article is not presently protected, so you or anyone else may edit there. However, and as with all our articles, any such edits need to be measured in terms of wikipedia's standing policies and guidelines, some of which specifically address items like conflict of interest (real or potential), neutrality, reliable sourcing and placing undue weight on claims and viewpoints held only by a distinct minority in the relevant field of inquiry. While one can certainly appreciate your desire to see info to be accurate and more complete, we do need to apply our stated rules and standards as equally for this article, as any other.
 * The problems with your additions have been twofold: firstly, your edits removed sections of text and citations, that was critical in some regard to prof Van Sertima's work, and of some of the conclusions he drew from that work. You would be aware that his proposals have generated controversies within the relevant scholarly fields, and that whatever intrinsic value his work may or may not possess, those conclusions are not shared by a great majority of researchers in those fields. Hence, it is entirely appropriate for the article to reflect and state those controversies and critical views; removing them out of hand won't do, I'm afraid.
 * Secondly, the material that you did insert had been published previously elsewhere, namely at the Journal of African Civilizations website. With very few exceptions we discourage the verbatim reprinting of material from other sources: partly out of copyright violation concerns (and even if we did have explicit written permission from the author to reuse, our licensing conditions can often make that problematic anyway). And partly because material written for other sources typically is neither suitable nor amenable to wikipedia's purpose, tone and intent. For example, wikipedia is not a memorial and is not supposed to be written with the style and content of obituary notices, or the like. Our articles are supposed to cover in neutral fashion the individual's notable accomplishments or other aspects of their contributions and life that are, well, encyclopaedic in nature; other accompanying information and details that are not directly relevant to the individual's notability are not usually dealt with here. In particular we avoid eulogising or valedictory statements, no matter who the article's subject is.
 * Hope you can understand the situation and reasoning here. As mentioned, as long as conflict of interest, neutrality, and balance guidelines are observed, someone connected with the article's subject can contribute here, if reliable and independent verifiable sources are used to substantiate statements made. If there is still missing or incomplete information you think ought to be covered, it ought firstly to be written specifically for the article (and not just reproduced from elsewhere), and in a tone and style harmonious with wikipedia's house rules and aims. If in doubt, you can suggest the amendments on the article's talkpage, and other editors here may review and either agree, modify, or otherwise deal with, the suggestion. Best regards, --cjllw  ʘ  TALK 06:10, 7 June 2009 (UTC)