This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 1, 2011 and February 1, 2017. |
Daily page views
|
Hello, wiki community. I was wondering if someone could explain to me what need to done to this article in terms of wikification. I did the last major addition to it and I want to know what needs to be done. -- chemica 08:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
"French trade centered on the Senegal River and in the Cape Verde region" --History section
Cape Verde is a former Portuguese colony located off the western coast of Africa and named after Cap-Vert, a peninsula in Senegal. Both of them mean Green Cape. I think French didn't center in Cape Verde but in Cap-Vert. But I don't have any references right now. -- Kurihaya ( talk) 11:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I thought that a confederation itself is loose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.102.9.101 ( talk) 11:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Where is the basic country data block? You know, capital, government type, official language(s), location, establishment date, etc. There are a lot of questions that pop into mind, now that I know that this Senegambia thing existed. Like, why is this not listed at UN member states? Did it have a flag of its own? What was its currency? etc... Mátyás ( talk) 13:47, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
OK, it wouldn't be on the
UN member states listing, as a
confederacy is not generally considered a country, but more like a tight alliance. And you are right, if I would be really interested, I would find the time and the resources to make this article more complete, but the thing is I'm not.
Mátyás (
talk) 12:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
What is this? It says in the article to see "Sandwich Sovereignties" "above", but this is the only mention of the term in the article... Tomer talk 14:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
It says Senegal got threats from Nkrumah's Ghana but he had been both dead and out of office for a long time by then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.221.197 ( talk) 04:52, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian ( talk) 19:07, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Senegambia Confederation → Senegambia – The common country name is Senegambia, the Senegambian Confederation is the official name.relisted -- Mike Cline ( talk) 21:28, 4 December 2011 (UTC) -- Spesh531, My talk, and External links 03:26, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
What exactly is disputed in the "End of the Confederation" section? The POV tag was set in April 2012 without any explanation, attempt at discussion, or then-recent edit to cause this tag. Varana ( talk) 18:10, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
@ Rulis1: This back-and-forth is senseless. I will again clearly outline why your edits are problematic: You are changing sentences to remove anything which might suggest that the Senegambia Confederation's end could be partially attributed to Senegal, including:
None of these changes are supported by the sources. All of the old claims are attributed to reliable sources. To support your changes, you just inserted "Le pacte du 29 decembre 1981 instituant la Confederation de la Senegambie", a document from 1982. As outlined above, however, almost all of your changes involve the collapse of the Senegambia Confederation in the years after 1982, particularily the events of 1989.
I kindly ask you to restore the pervious version which was supported by the sources, and to stop changing the article in a way which only blames Gambia.
Applodion (
talk) 19:43, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
@
Rulis1: No, I don't want to suggest that your sources are partisan. What I am saying is that reliable researchers blame both sides for the collapse of the confederation. That's not a partisan viewpoint. And again: Wikipedia does not work in the way you want it to; we cannot leave out those "partisan and no partisan researchers" because Wikipedia is all about sources.
I am going to be honest here. I do not care at all who was responsible for the failure of the Senegambia Confederation. What I care about is that the reality of events is reflected; and there are not ten different viewpoints of reality, there is one reality. Per Wikipedia's rules, if reliable sources say X, we have to say X as well even if we do not agree with it. Your additions, overall, do not reflect the sources - and the new ones you added also do not support what you are inserting into the article. The stuff you reference to the African American Studies Center, for example, does not seem to match the source. You can add stuff, but it has to be based on sources, not your own opinions.
Applodion (
talk) 16:03, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
@ Rulis1: Sup, I just wanted to inform you that I have started expanding / improving the article. I am far from done, and this proccess will probably need a few days. Regardless, I wanted to ask your opinion on these initial changes. I have removed some of the more suggestive language, and included stuff which the Gambians did to sink the union, while also outlining the large amount of resources Senegal invested into the united military. Applodion ( talk) 16:17, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
I think this version is less biased than the previous as well. I will have to do further researches on my part too so that we can see what can be rectified if any. This will take some times. Thank you for your honesty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rulis1 ( talk • contribs) 12:36, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on February 1, 2011 and February 1, 2017. |
Daily page views
|
Hello, wiki community. I was wondering if someone could explain to me what need to done to this article in terms of wikification. I did the last major addition to it and I want to know what needs to be done. -- chemica 08:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
"French trade centered on the Senegal River and in the Cape Verde region" --History section
Cape Verde is a former Portuguese colony located off the western coast of Africa and named after Cap-Vert, a peninsula in Senegal. Both of them mean Green Cape. I think French didn't center in Cape Verde but in Cap-Vert. But I don't have any references right now. -- Kurihaya ( talk) 11:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
I thought that a confederation itself is loose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.102.9.101 ( talk) 11:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Where is the basic country data block? You know, capital, government type, official language(s), location, establishment date, etc. There are a lot of questions that pop into mind, now that I know that this Senegambia thing existed. Like, why is this not listed at UN member states? Did it have a flag of its own? What was its currency? etc... Mátyás ( talk) 13:47, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
OK, it wouldn't be on the
UN member states listing, as a
confederacy is not generally considered a country, but more like a tight alliance. And you are right, if I would be really interested, I would find the time and the resources to make this article more complete, but the thing is I'm not.
Mátyás (
talk) 12:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
What is this? It says in the article to see "Sandwich Sovereignties" "above", but this is the only mention of the term in the article... Tomer talk 14:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
It says Senegal got threats from Nkrumah's Ghana but he had been both dead and out of office for a long time by then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.221.197 ( talk) 04:52, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
No consensus to move. Vegaswikian ( talk) 19:07, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
Senegambia Confederation → Senegambia – The common country name is Senegambia, the Senegambian Confederation is the official name.relisted -- Mike Cline ( talk) 21:28, 4 December 2011 (UTC) -- Spesh531, My talk, and External links 03:26, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
What exactly is disputed in the "End of the Confederation" section? The POV tag was set in April 2012 without any explanation, attempt at discussion, or then-recent edit to cause this tag. Varana ( talk) 18:10, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
@ Rulis1: This back-and-forth is senseless. I will again clearly outline why your edits are problematic: You are changing sentences to remove anything which might suggest that the Senegambia Confederation's end could be partially attributed to Senegal, including:
None of these changes are supported by the sources. All of the old claims are attributed to reliable sources. To support your changes, you just inserted "Le pacte du 29 decembre 1981 instituant la Confederation de la Senegambie", a document from 1982. As outlined above, however, almost all of your changes involve the collapse of the Senegambia Confederation in the years after 1982, particularily the events of 1989.
I kindly ask you to restore the pervious version which was supported by the sources, and to stop changing the article in a way which only blames Gambia.
Applodion (
talk) 19:43, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
@
Rulis1: No, I don't want to suggest that your sources are partisan. What I am saying is that reliable researchers blame both sides for the collapse of the confederation. That's not a partisan viewpoint. And again: Wikipedia does not work in the way you want it to; we cannot leave out those "partisan and no partisan researchers" because Wikipedia is all about sources.
I am going to be honest here. I do not care at all who was responsible for the failure of the Senegambia Confederation. What I care about is that the reality of events is reflected; and there are not ten different viewpoints of reality, there is one reality. Per Wikipedia's rules, if reliable sources say X, we have to say X as well even if we do not agree with it. Your additions, overall, do not reflect the sources - and the new ones you added also do not support what you are inserting into the article. The stuff you reference to the African American Studies Center, for example, does not seem to match the source. You can add stuff, but it has to be based on sources, not your own opinions.
Applodion (
talk) 16:03, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
@ Rulis1: Sup, I just wanted to inform you that I have started expanding / improving the article. I am far from done, and this proccess will probably need a few days. Regardless, I wanted to ask your opinion on these initial changes. I have removed some of the more suggestive language, and included stuff which the Gambians did to sink the union, while also outlining the large amount of resources Senegal invested into the united military. Applodion ( talk) 16:17, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
I think this version is less biased than the previous as well. I will have to do further researches on my part too so that we can see what can be rectified if any. This will take some times. Thank you for your honesty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rulis1 ( talk • contribs) 12:36, 13 July 2022 (UTC)