Talk:Black Africa
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
The article on Black Africa is supported by the WikiProject on Football, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of football related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ. |
|---|---|
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
User:Deeceevoice wrote the following stub for this article: There are black nations in East Africa situated above the Sahara. So, though technically inaccurate, the term "sub-Saharan Africa" commonly refers to, but is not necessarily synonymous with, Black Africa. Now that reads more like a reaction to something, so I rewrote it. Furthermore, I suppose he meant in the Sahara, so I changed that. Plus some more, but I'm not completely sure if what I wrote is entirely correct. I decide to follow the policy of being bold, assuming that soon enough someone will read this who knows more (maybe User:Deeceevoice?). Also, I added a stub-template, but since little more can be said about the subject if what I say is true (it really comes down to a redirect with an explanation) I'm not sure if that makes sense. DirkvdM 18:51, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks to the unnamed user who caught the Djibouti gaff. I was trying to figure out how to reword the paragraph, first thinking about other black nations which are as far north as Sudan (which is considered North Africa), of which Djibouti is one -- and then changed my mind and dealt with Saharan nations. Of course Djibouti is not a Saharan nation. Again, thanks for the catch. deeceevoice 22:32, 16 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Suggested merger w/Sub-Saharan Africa
Absolutely not. I've rewritten this article to make it clear that the two are not synonymous. Wikipedia should not continue to perpetuate the myth that "black" Africa is limited to regions south of the Sahara. It is simply untrue. deeceevoice 17:25, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
What are you? A Martin Bernal-like POV pusher for your "black" cause? If you want to add your afrocentrist views, why don't you -at least- label them as so? Asterion 18:28, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
And what are you? An asshole? If you want to add your irrelevant, ignorant comments, why don't you - at least - label them so? *x*deeceevoice 18:44, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
===>Miscommunication? I'm not suggesting they are identical, but the "Black Africa" article is a stub, and I don't think that it merits its own entire entry. It should probably become a section in the Sub-Saharan Africa article. Granted, not all blacks live south of the Sahara (like the miniscule black Moroccan population) and not all who live south of the Sahara are black (like the Boers), but the vast majority of either overlaps with the other. And personal attacks just weaken your argument. Justin (koavf) 20:08, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
Mind your business. I didn't attack you. And when someone -- like the poster above -- steps to me with disrespect, I'm entitled to respond however I please. deeceevoice 20:18, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
===>No need to get defensive You made it public discussion by adding it to this talk page, instead of Asterion's page or e-mailing him, so you made invite others to discuss. I'm just trying to help you be diplomatic about the whole affair. Of course you're entitled to respond how you please - and so am I. I don't have any authority over you and you certainly don't have any over me. Justin (koavf) 01:49, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
I'm not being defensive. Get a clue. Being "diplomatic" as you put it is about being fair. Admonishing me and ignoring the initiator of the exchange is hardly that. How the hell do you get off doin' that and thinkin' you're contributing? It's one-sided and absolutely unwelcome. I didn't "invite" you to do jack. Again, mind ya bizness. deeceevoice 07:01, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
===>Clearly, you are defensive And here's my proof: I didn't direct the commment to you, but you interpreted it as being solely about you. It was about both of you, and if you hadn't had an attitude of defensiveness, you could have seen that. If you want to have an argument with someone, particularly a petty one, you should have it on that person's talk page or via e-mail - it's a personal discussion. Talk pages are for discussing the article at hand. Dat's ma bizness, yo. Justin (koavf) 15:04, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
- Oh, puhleeze. Don't try to back-pedal The comment was a rejoinder to your response to my opinion on the matter. It clearly was directed at me. And I'm not defensive. I have no reason to be. And don't presume to school me on what talk pages are for. I'll use them as I see fit. Further your white-bwoi attempt at AAVE is as lame and off-the-wall as your ham-handed "diplomacy." *x* deeceevoice 15:38, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
===>Aight I'll use Talk pages for whatever I want, and don't school me, if you don't want to be schooled yourself. Clearly, you have some ax to grind, and there's no reason to take it out on me. Both you and Asterion were out of order. And how do you know I'm a "white-bwoi" [sic?]? You have no idea what my skin color is, and it's irrelevant to the discussion anyway. If you want to bring race into the discussion in a ham-handed way, it will probably get too personal pretty quickly, so I'd advise against it, but, of course, you'll use the Talk page as you see fit. Peace out. Justin (koavf) 16:16, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Well, so you finally address Asterion, huh? LMBAO. 'S a little too late to try diplomacy after you've already put your foot in your mouth. Oh. And now talk pages are for anything you want them to be? You clearly have a credibility problem. (Yawn.) You waste my time. *x* deeceevoice 12:34, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
That aside, I came back to say I've reconsidered. This probably should redirect to sub-Saharan Africa with appropriate verbiage. deeceevoice 13:45, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
