Talk:Congo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Africa
Africa Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Africa, which collaborates on articles related to Africa in Wikipedia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Disambig This article has been rated as dab-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

While attempting to disambiguate links to this page, I've discovered that pre-1880, Congo was often used to refer to the entire region. There is no article for this region during this time period or even the present day where one would be very useful when referring to shared culture. Any thoughts on what to do about this? Tedernst 08:39, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Many ethnic groups (eg. Bakongo and Lingala speaking people) live in both in both countries. See also Kongo Empire. Soukous music originated in towns in both Congos. When referring to both of them, the term "The Congos" is often used. Sometimes when "Congolese" is mentioned, it refers to both countries, or only one of them. So when Congolese is disambiguated to Democratic Republic of the Congo, it could be misleading. Maybe this could be explained on this page. --Ezeu 09:08, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] revert and dab style

The dab manual of style does not call for links other than to articles being disambiguated. My edits to move this page toward those style guidelines were reverted without edit summary or comment. I have changed the page back to reflect my changes. Please discuss here before further reversions related to this issue. Tedernst 09:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, obviously it isn't a pure dab. Only the bottom part is. Why didn't you remove the map too? Surely the manual of style doesn't provide for maps in dabs. Varizer 09:51, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
It's quite obviously not so obvious that this page should be anything other than a pure dab. If it needs to be something else, that fact needs to be made clear and not simply assumed. The vast majority of dab pages are pure dab pages. What is the reason that this page should not be one? Obviously the map is quite helpful in disambiguating these two countries, so it can stay. Please state your case why the extra wikilinks should stay. Opinions from others also welcome, obviously.Tedernst 17:49, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
If not here, then where will we properly disambgiguate Congo? It is not easy to disambgiguate Congo, if anything, we need to expand and elaborate even more on this page. "Dab manual of style" is a recommendation, not a rule. / Ezeu 00:29, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you're saying Ezeu. Doesn't the dab manual of style provide for what's needed to disambiguate articles? Varizer is saying more text is needed. I'm asking him/her to state a case for that. Is there a case? If so, what is it? I totally agree that the intent of the page is to disambiguate Congo. This is the place, for sure. Tedernst 00:41, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
As a charter member of the WikiProject disambiguation I suggest the rules were intended to be flexible. When an English-language user searches for Congo, s/he might not be sure which country they're looking for, and the map and the descriptive text are useful for that. It could be condensed, but there's no reason to try to narrow it down too much. I suggest, however, moving Congo river to the top of the "may also" list since that's the most likely alternative meaning. —Wahoofive (talk) 23:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
However, it must be decided whether this is a pure dab page or not a dab page at all: partial dab-pages are strongly discouraged. Enough information must be provided to allow the user to make a fairly swift and accurate choice. The map, as far as I see, would be very useful here (manuals of style are meant only for the average case). The text before the first header, though, can be considerably condensed. A discussion of usage and history is not necessary (and harmful); only enough for the knowledgeable reader to distinguish between them: however it may not be wise to remove so much that little difference is evident apart from their constitutional names. After editing a dab page, take a look at it and ask, does this make things easier for the reader? This dab page should be able to fit onto one screen. Neonumbers 05:17, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I trimmed most of the "extraneous" text about the two countries, because it already exists in the individual articles. I've also decided to be bold and stop indenting another step with my comment :-) As for the map, I agree that it should stay. It is unusual to have graphics on a dab page, but in this case, it works for the purpose, which is to help the reader quickly figure out which country they were thinking about. In this case, a slavish obedience to the rules would be the Wrong Thing to do. --RoySmith 18:13, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

I like RoySmith's version. The recent reversion, which deletes the disambig tag, gives too much information. My only suggestion is that Roy's version indicate that DRC was once called Zaire. --BrianSmithson 18:26, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
While I support the disambiguation project, and RoySmith's efforts, I think in this case the longer text is appropriate. In my opinion Varizer's version is good, and serves the purpose very well, and has for over a year; I don't believe this is or should be a "pure" disambiguation page, because many people who type "Congo" are going to be looking for exactly what's here: the proper current and historical names used in the region.
I do think the disamb tag should be reinstated because of the other usages on this page. On the other hand, while I understand your frustration, Varizer, please refrain from language like "fascists" (in your edit summary). My two cents. — Catherine\talk 19:07, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
Then the article part and the disambiguated part must be put on different pages. I'm sure, if necessary, a suitable name could be found for the article part.
I do not think this is such an exceptional case as to merit a semi-disambiguation page - I don't think any case does. A decision must be made as to whether this is a disambiguation page or not — I am personally inclined to see this as a dab page but I will leave that decision to others.
If it is decided that this is a dab page, then a version more trimmed than RoySmith's version - yes, even less text than that - should follow; otherwise the dab template must be removed. Remember that a disambiguation page is not intended to provide any knowledge information at all, only what needs to be there to disambiguate.
That's what I think, anyway. Neonumbers 09:24, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

How about leaving the extended text here at Congo, with the remaining list moved to Congo (disambiguation)? — Catherine\talk 21:10, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

This dab page looks good now. I have added Belgian Congo, French Congo and Middle Congo as well. French Congo could probably be merged with Middle Congo (several other pages linked on this dab page could probably be merged as well), but since they are currently separate articles, they should (in my opinion) be dab-ed here. / Ezeu 21:45, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
I emphasise again that whether or not this is a dab page must be decided and followed; if necessary this page must be split in two.
Catherine, that works fine by me; I don't claim to be an expert on what "Congo" does, doesn't or is more or less likely to mean. Congo could, arguably, for all I know, be made into an article that outlines a combined history while there was only one Congo — if there ever was a time, which I have no idea about! As long as it's not a semi-dab page :-) Neonumbers 06:20, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Congo (disambiguation) created

Okay, I've been bold and created Congo (disambiguation), and tidied up as I thought best, including moving interlanguage links to the dab page, since they all seemed to be dabs themselves. Let's collaborate till we all agree on what belongs where. Once that's settled, perhaps we can work together on tidying up Special:Whatlinkshere/Congo. Fair enough? — Catherine\talk 19:46, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Catherine, well done. / Ezeu 00:08, 8 December 2005 (UTC)


I was at school and my teacher asked us this question "Which two countries comprise the Congo?" I asked my dad (who was in the army for 21 years and has been to the Congo)there is NOT two countries that comprise the Congo.I figured out that some teachers that thing they know everything are wrong!There is NOT two countries that comprise the Congo!! Lacey **TigerEyes** October,30 2007 9:55 PM

[edit] Nomenclature: Congo Region and Middle Africa

Today I created the article Congo (region) mainly because I felt that it was missing from Template:Regions of the world. Only afterwards did I discover that Congo already exists, but that this article seems to restrict itself to dealing solely with the two Congos, and not the wider, vaguer subregion. What is the preferred option now: should Congo me merged with Congo (region) and redirect to Congo (disambiguation) instead? Please have your say here. Thanks.

And a related issue: I would argue that the UN designation Middle Africa - which currently redirects to Central Africa - is the least ambiguous name for the region, as listed at Template:Africa, just like Southern Africa is used to effectively disambiguate from South Africa. Please respond here. Thanks! // Big Adamsky • BA's talk page 10:42, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What in the world is N.E.G.R.O?

I found a passage in the Congo (ROC) section in this article, that looks like vandalism. Can someone else see that, or alternatively, explain the whole N.E.G.R.O business? Thanks. Themalau 13:07, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Zaire from 1999-2005?

According to Zaire article "Zaire (spelled Zaïre in French) was the name of the Democratic Republic of the Congo between October 27, 1971, and May 17, 1997." 204.19.245.112 06:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC) Wisebuddy

[edit] Propose deletion of this page and redirect to Congo (disambiguation)

Although I can see that there was a theoretical reason for retaining this overview as well as the disambig page, in practice I don't think it adds anything to the functions already covered by the disambig page. It's really just a list of articles, and the disambig plus the articles themselves provide all you need. Furthermore is a user is looking for the music 'Congo' or 'Congo' the movie and they just type in 'Congo', they have to go through two pages before they hit it. Rexparry sydney 12:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree. Merge them. The two pages were split from a single page mostly because someone invoked MOSDAB and stripped the article from useful information. To circumvent the MOSDAB pedantry, a separate page, Congo (disambiguation), was created to be the dab page and Congo was kept without the {{disambig}} tag see discussion here. I do not know if MOSDAB has changed substantially since then, but as it is now, it does not prohibit us from having an informative dab page, and does actually specifically mention this page as an example where images can be acceptable in a dab page. --Ezeu 14:54, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
  • No complaints, so merged. --Ezeu 03:14, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Where is clothing

There is no clothing section and kids need to know this for progects —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Atrain 1008 (talk • contribs) 19:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC).

Kids need to go to the library. --Ezeu 20:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image inclusion and explanations.

For what it's worth, I'm a fan of MoS:DAB and have stripped down many wordy disambiguation pages, but this is a case where more detail is clearly warranted. The problem is that simply saying "Congo-Brazzaville" doesn't mean a whole lot to most people and isn't specific as to which Congo it is if you don't know what Brazzaville or Kinshasa are. The image and brief history helps clarify which Congo you'd like to see... which is the whole point of disambiguation pages. SnowFire 14:55, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I completely agree that the image is appropriate in this case. I also did some other major changes:
  • Merged in all information from Congo, Kongo and Kongō to this one page
  • Substantially reorganized the sections
  • Did away with the Table of Contents, to make room for the picture
If anyone disagrees with my changes, feel free to tweak or discuss. This is obviously a very confusing topic.  :/ --Elonka 22:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
(followup) I have also redirected Congos to link to here. It was basically a repeat of the information on the disambiguation page, and not much was linking to it. If someone can think of a compelling reason that it should still be its own article though, we can easily re-establish it. --Elonka 21:02, 15 December 2007 (UTC)