This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Half of the article is the stuff that 172 pasted everywhere And that "stuff" pertains to the "colonization of Africa".
Maybe we could merge all the article you edited in just one ;). I'm not historian do you feel to write something in Algerian War of Independence it's a major lack in Wikipedia. Ericd
A succint page on colonization of Africa is essential. Ericd’s that a separate article on the Algerian War of Independence is needed as well.
172: Go to my user page. There’s a surprise there.
Including Madeira as a colony is absurd, it had no previous indeginous population, present day population is of european descent and it is an autonumous region of Portugal
This article is an absolute mess as far as organization, sentence structure, and clarity. Like in the Walter Rodney section -- "Africa was being underdeveloped through the resources taken." What does this even mean??? And the article starts refering to someone named "Khapoya" out of nowhere, with no introduction. Anyone know how to add a flag to the page as being in need of revisions? -- JJWWiki 22:45, 11 April 2021
Why is the American spelling of colonization used? Most English-speaking countries in Africa use commonwealth English, so why American?? Aaker 14:02, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I am American, but I agree. It just seems weird to me to see "Colonisation of Africa" with a "z" instead of an "s". The manual of style seems to agree. I'm going to rename the page. -- Tea and crumpets 15:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
The Manual of Style suggests that we avoid the the word "colonization" or "colonisation" altogether in the title. Therefore, i suggest we retitle the article "Colonialism in Africa."
I second that "Colonialism in Africa" would avoid any confusion or debate in the title and retain the the same meaning, but I'll leave that for someone else to change. I am going to update the 17 uses of "colonization" to "colonisation." JJWWiki 22:08, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Nice twist to blame The Scramble for Africa on the Germans. Lars T. 20:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
In response to the above comment: The reference to Bismarck's Berlin Conference and the policy of New Imperialism as the impetus for The Scramble for Africa does not appear a biased claim in this article nor a nationalist attack on Germany by any means; it is generally acknowledged that the Conference and Bismarck's dominant role in European politics during that period culminated in the era's rapid colonization of Africa (for example, as in college-level/AP European History textbooks). -- Tpugliese01 ( talk) 16:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
I made a failed attempt to create an edit notice using the {{ British-English-editnotice}} template. Sorry about the mistake, but this notice is now moved to the top of the article. Can an admin please create this edit notice? -- Fama Clamosa ( talk) 18:42, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone else think that the map under "The Scramble for Africa" on the right, should be replaced with this larger one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GameSlayerGS ( talk • contribs) 14:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Way too much of this article Is based on the opinion of one person, Vincent Khapoya, a modern day person. Is Khapoya widely acknowledged as 'the Einstein of the history of the colonization of Africa?" It seems to me that since so many assertions of fact made in the article are based on the views of this person, there should be a section vetting his credibility as a widely recognized and respected authority. Without it, It seems less an encyclopedic article on the colonization of Africa than a presentation of the views of Vincent Khapoya, which may be biased. This strikes me as odd and typical of the sort of things that make people consider Wikipedia at best a good starting point for seeking info about something but nothing you could ever 'take to the bank' without external verification.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Colonisation of Africa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:24, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The negatives impact on colonialism in Africa 41.222.180.100 ( talk) 12:04, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Phoenicians are mentioned, but they are from Asia /info/en/?search=Phoenicia — Preceding unsigned comment added by TurnerValley ( talk • contribs) 04:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
The article indicates that the earliest European colony inAfrica was Cape Town in 1652, but the Portuguese founded Luanda in 1576. FelipeVO ( talk) 12:47, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 August 2022 and 7 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): NoelleSeniorTrotter ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Dsackey ( talk) 18:13, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Pretty simple contention here - I'm not sure the totality of subject material covered under this article should be placed in the same article, at least not without much further clarification. There are a few main contentions motivating this:
The article, all in all, comes across entirely incohesive, unified only by a vague sense that all its subject matter may be described with the same term, without consideration for how said term is employed differently in each topic. Put differently, this article has little discussion on how topics relate, calling into question whether topics are better placed on dedicated articles that already exist.
Part of this comes down to the mere ambiguity of words, especially those such as "colonisation". Simply put, it does not seem to me that this term has any consistent 'meaning', nor is one clearly given, articulated, maintained, or justified by the article. While we obviously refer to migration of human populations to a region in order to exploit resources (for subsistence) as "colonisation" in the literal sense, we lack an article on "Colonisation of Europe" because we clearly draw some mental difference between mere migration to a region in a pre-historic or at least pre-modern sense (think, the movement of human populations into Europe, the spread of Near Eastern farmers and their offspring across Europe) and the Imperial efforts driven by (mostly) European states (say, the events from the early-modern era onwards). For that matter, I also would advocate excluding Medieval expansion into the African continent by Arabs/Muslims from "Colonisation" for the same reason we typically do not refer to the unification of Arabia or conquest of Persia as "Colonisation", or the Ottoman annexation of Anatolia, or even the Crusades as such. I reckon the article should have its contents divided between:
The place of "settler-colonies" (ie: founding cities by populations who move to an area in order to gain some edge from its resources, usually location & trade) within this schema is unclear here, but note that we already have such an article, "Colonies in antiquity", for discussing many such instances in antiquity. One such article may be made for a broader set of use-cases, which could then also encompass Swahili settler-colonies in places like Madagascar, and various "colony" communities founded by traders in / from West African regions (ie: "Tukrir" settlements in East/Central Africa, historic Hausa communities without Hausaland)...
"Colonisation of Africa" may then be made into a Disambiguation to refer to any of these potential uses of the term. HiddenHistoryPedia ( talk) 17:25, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2024 and 10 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): 240Daryl ( article contribs). Peer reviewers: Urdadsgf.
— Assignment last updated by Bbalicia ( talk) 00:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Moved from Article:
"...and potentially the Malays as it is pertaining to distinguishing between immigration and settler colonialism..."
Is there any evidence that Malays established colonies in Africa? If they simply migrated to Africa freely, this does not need to be mentioned in the lead section of an article concerning the colonisation of Africa. Chino-Catane ( talk) 11:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Half of the article is the stuff that 172 pasted everywhere And that "stuff" pertains to the "colonization of Africa".
Maybe we could merge all the article you edited in just one ;). I'm not historian do you feel to write something in Algerian War of Independence it's a major lack in Wikipedia. Ericd
A succint page on colonization of Africa is essential. Ericd’s that a separate article on the Algerian War of Independence is needed as well.
172: Go to my user page. There’s a surprise there.
Including Madeira as a colony is absurd, it had no previous indeginous population, present day population is of european descent and it is an autonumous region of Portugal
This article is an absolute mess as far as organization, sentence structure, and clarity. Like in the Walter Rodney section -- "Africa was being underdeveloped through the resources taken." What does this even mean??? And the article starts refering to someone named "Khapoya" out of nowhere, with no introduction. Anyone know how to add a flag to the page as being in need of revisions? -- JJWWiki 22:45, 11 April 2021
Why is the American spelling of colonization used? Most English-speaking countries in Africa use commonwealth English, so why American?? Aaker 14:02, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I am American, but I agree. It just seems weird to me to see "Colonisation of Africa" with a "z" instead of an "s". The manual of style seems to agree. I'm going to rename the page. -- Tea and crumpets 15:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
The Manual of Style suggests that we avoid the the word "colonization" or "colonisation" altogether in the title. Therefore, i suggest we retitle the article "Colonialism in Africa."
I second that "Colonialism in Africa" would avoid any confusion or debate in the title and retain the the same meaning, but I'll leave that for someone else to change. I am going to update the 17 uses of "colonization" to "colonisation." JJWWiki 22:08, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Nice twist to blame The Scramble for Africa on the Germans. Lars T. 20:22, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
In response to the above comment: The reference to Bismarck's Berlin Conference and the policy of New Imperialism as the impetus for The Scramble for Africa does not appear a biased claim in this article nor a nationalist attack on Germany by any means; it is generally acknowledged that the Conference and Bismarck's dominant role in European politics during that period culminated in the era's rapid colonization of Africa (for example, as in college-level/AP European History textbooks). -- Tpugliese01 ( talk) 16:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
I made a failed attempt to create an edit notice using the {{ British-English-editnotice}} template. Sorry about the mistake, but this notice is now moved to the top of the article. Can an admin please create this edit notice? -- Fama Clamosa ( talk) 18:42, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone else think that the map under "The Scramble for Africa" on the right, should be replaced with this larger one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GameSlayerGS ( talk • contribs) 14:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Way too much of this article Is based on the opinion of one person, Vincent Khapoya, a modern day person. Is Khapoya widely acknowledged as 'the Einstein of the history of the colonization of Africa?" It seems to me that since so many assertions of fact made in the article are based on the views of this person, there should be a section vetting his credibility as a widely recognized and respected authority. Without it, It seems less an encyclopedic article on the colonization of Africa than a presentation of the views of Vincent Khapoya, which may be biased. This strikes me as odd and typical of the sort of things that make people consider Wikipedia at best a good starting point for seeking info about something but nothing you could ever 'take to the bank' without external verification.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Colonisation of Africa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:24, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
The negatives impact on colonialism in Africa 41.222.180.100 ( talk) 12:04, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Phoenicians are mentioned, but they are from Asia /info/en/?search=Phoenicia — Preceding unsigned comment added by TurnerValley ( talk • contribs) 04:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)
The article indicates that the earliest European colony inAfrica was Cape Town in 1652, but the Portuguese founded Luanda in 1576. FelipeVO ( talk) 12:47, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 August 2022 and 7 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): NoelleSeniorTrotter ( article contribs).
— Assignment last updated by Dsackey ( talk) 18:13, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
Pretty simple contention here - I'm not sure the totality of subject material covered under this article should be placed in the same article, at least not without much further clarification. There are a few main contentions motivating this:
The article, all in all, comes across entirely incohesive, unified only by a vague sense that all its subject matter may be described with the same term, without consideration for how said term is employed differently in each topic. Put differently, this article has little discussion on how topics relate, calling into question whether topics are better placed on dedicated articles that already exist.
Part of this comes down to the mere ambiguity of words, especially those such as "colonisation". Simply put, it does not seem to me that this term has any consistent 'meaning', nor is one clearly given, articulated, maintained, or justified by the article. While we obviously refer to migration of human populations to a region in order to exploit resources (for subsistence) as "colonisation" in the literal sense, we lack an article on "Colonisation of Europe" because we clearly draw some mental difference between mere migration to a region in a pre-historic or at least pre-modern sense (think, the movement of human populations into Europe, the spread of Near Eastern farmers and their offspring across Europe) and the Imperial efforts driven by (mostly) European states (say, the events from the early-modern era onwards). For that matter, I also would advocate excluding Medieval expansion into the African continent by Arabs/Muslims from "Colonisation" for the same reason we typically do not refer to the unification of Arabia or conquest of Persia as "Colonisation", or the Ottoman annexation of Anatolia, or even the Crusades as such. I reckon the article should have its contents divided between:
The place of "settler-colonies" (ie: founding cities by populations who move to an area in order to gain some edge from its resources, usually location & trade) within this schema is unclear here, but note that we already have such an article, "Colonies in antiquity", for discussing many such instances in antiquity. One such article may be made for a broader set of use-cases, which could then also encompass Swahili settler-colonies in places like Madagascar, and various "colony" communities founded by traders in / from West African regions (ie: "Tukrir" settlements in East/Central Africa, historic Hausa communities without Hausaland)...
"Colonisation of Africa" may then be made into a Disambiguation to refer to any of these potential uses of the term. HiddenHistoryPedia ( talk) 17:25, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2024 and 10 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): 240Daryl ( article contribs). Peer reviewers: Urdadsgf.
— Assignment last updated by Bbalicia ( talk) 00:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Moved from Article:
"...and potentially the Malays as it is pertaining to distinguishing between immigration and settler colonialism..."
Is there any evidence that Malays established colonies in Africa? If they simply migrated to Africa freely, this does not need to be mentioned in the lead section of an article concerning the colonisation of Africa. Chino-Catane ( talk) 11:33, 4 June 2024 (UTC)