Talk:Nok culture
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Nok culture is within the scope of WikiProject Nigeria, a collaborative attempt to improve articles related to Nigeria. Please participate by editing the article or visiting the project page for more details. If you nominate a Nigeria-related page for deletion, please list it at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Nigeria. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
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. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. | ||
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject Niger. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
The informations about Nok are not precise in many ways. --89.59.143.132 17:24, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
Don't forget the germans who started an archaeological project on Nok in 2005! I added some references.
I added more information about the Nok that I got through the French Wikipedia article. Hopefully I can finish translating some more later today, but if anybody would like to pick up where I left off and check to make sure I got everything right. Also, before I editted the article, it claimed the Nok civilization dated back to 3000 BC. The French article states 1000 BC. I did some research and I can't seem to find anything putting the date at 3000 BC - in fact, going as far as 1000 BC seemed a little liberal from what all I found.--Edaru 14:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
[1] - this edit was a copyright violation from [2] which I didn't note in the edit summary reverting it. --Cherry blossom tree 16:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
The Italian-language Wikipedia it:Nok gives the tenth century BC. I think we should go with what the French & Italian articles say (1000 BC) rather than 3000 BC, in the absence of any reliable sources. I will make that change. --Mathew5000 13:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] date
I think it's pretty clear that the previous figure of "3000 BC" was a typo for "3000 years ago" - this would square with all the other figures of 1000 BC. The article, unfortunately, still needs sources. --Storkk 10:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Litearture
I remember there was an article about the Nok culture in Scientific American a couple of years ago (in the 80s?). Who still has a copy. Please cite. Nannus 21:25, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] bad phrase
Nok culture terracottas are heralded as the prime evidence of pre-colonial civilization in sub-Saharan Africa the above sentence is a problem, it is one of those apologiese for a racist opinion and in the apology is the assumption of racism. pre-colonial African civilizations are not in dispute to state it like this assumes that they could be any dispute to this fact and thus introduce reasonable doubt.--HalaTruth(ሀላካሕ) 21:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC) Looks fine to me, it must be your inherent favouring of unsourced statements in favour of "Nok" that is causing the problem here. 81.149.82.243 10:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Weasle words and condescending tone
I just realized that this artcile needs a weasle word,tag there is a lot of double speak and strange language which is almost assumping it is a mystery that Blacks could have an Iron age. Until the article can be clean this warning is needed.--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ 18:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't notice any condescending tone, they must of changed the edit? I'll see if I can dig up some reliable information on Nok civilization in order to contribute..Mahmud II 21:36, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
There actually seems to be no sources to claim that they were in the "Iron Age" listed here so unfortunatly that could be a problem, and in all fairness this is the only article I know claiming that Africa did have an Iron age without outside interferance. Also the article didnt seemt to be condescending in the slightest, in fact it seemed to look favourably on something with almost no sources to back up it's claims 81.149.82.243 10:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removed original research
I know understand the other users frustrations:
Saharan Commerce
The sub-Saharan region of Africa at that time was divided into two large zones: the savannah, where small communities of farmers lived in northern fertile regions with favorable agriculture, and the tropical forest which covered the majority of the southern zone where hunter-gatherers lived along the coastal areas.
About 2,500 years ago, the populations of Northern Africa were forced south by drought (with women, children, cattle, weapons, and luggage) to the Gulf of Guinea and the south of the continent.[citation needed] They introduced a new way of life because these tribes grew grain and vegetables and raised cows, sheep, and goats.[citation needed] The men knew metallurgy (iron); each group had its own ceramic style.[citation needed] It was the beginning of the Iron Age in Africa and the Nok culture was the first known iron-working community in Western Africa. Merchants probably began to cross the Sahara in the course of the first millennium BC with horse-drawn chariots.[citation needed] The West Africans exchanged gold, slaves, ivory, salted animal products, cloth, ceramic, glass, fruits, and horses.[citation needed] Impressed by this last animal, Nok artists modeled statuettes of riders, dignitaries on horseback, pieces today that are very rare and of great value on the art market.
there is absolutly nothing that excuses this from being called OR. It cannot stay in the article until it becomes an encyclopedic section, not original opinion. "they introduced a new way of life because these tribe grew grain" who said this, where is the ref, it is an editors opinion.--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ 18:27, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
It is far to OR to be used, also the fact that some of it isnt even slightly referencable against anything else that must exclude it from the main article. 81.149.82.243 10:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
