en User talk:AfricaTanz

reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.

Beeblebrox (talk) 01:39, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Solomon Islands reply to your question

For the name of the country try https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/bp.html or http://www.un.int/wcm/content/site/solomonislands or any SI government site or even Solomon Islands. The Solomon Islands refers to the archipelago, which includes the nation of Solomon Islands but also other areas such as Bougainville, which is a province of another country, PNG. 'The' Solomon Islands has a separate page in wikipedia at The Solomon Islands (archipelago). I actually work in the Ministry for Justice and Legal Affairs, Solomon Islands under RAMSI, which is the multilateral peace force carefully called the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands not the Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands, which would upset PNG. Before independence in 1978 the islands that now make up Solomon Islands came under the colonial British administration for the archipelago and was in fact called the Solomon Islands because, to them, it was just a collection of islands; the name Solomon Islands was chosen to differentiate the new nation but colonial habits die hard so most Brits still talk about the Solomon Islands when they mean the nation. Solomon Islanders would like to get away from the colonial past so putting in the 'the' can be rather insulting. E x nihil ^(talk) 06:43, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but you have not yet proven that "Solomon Islands" is correct. (1) Your personal knowledge is irrelevant. (2) Wikipedia is not a proper source for Wikipedia. (3) Whether some Solomon Islanders would be insulted is also irrelevant. (4) The Central Intelligence Agency website uses "the Solomon Islands" in places. (5) The United States Department of State refers to the country as "the Solomon Islands". (6) As does the United Nations. Any further discussion should be on the article discussion page, not my talk page. AfricaTanz (talk) 12:58, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank by the ortography correction

I think my spelling in English is very bad, according other editors have written me, because I want to thank you that you've explained what I wrote in the article of the Tanzanian Americans with other words. That could facilitate reading. Well, I had mentioned the Tanzanians´s professions that were in the United States based on the Encyclopedia of Chicago, because if many Tanzanians have certain professions in Chicago, many Tanzanians have them in the U.S., but that does not matter much.--Isinbill (talk) 14:05, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot assume that the characteristics of the Tanzanians living in Chicago are representative of Tanzanians living elsewhere in the United States. AfricaTanz (talk) 14:16, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not that. The simple fact that there are, for example, a group of carpenters from some origin in a U.S., already would mean that there is a group of carpenters from that origin in the U.S., because that place belongs to the U.S.--Isinbill (talk) 14:22, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GDP data for Tanzania

A difference of population estimates between the IMF and the national statistical office is not unusual, since they're not calculated from the same base year, and it doesn't justify the deletion of GDP per capita figures. The difference between the two projections is small: the October 2012 WEO estimated a population of 43.019 million, and the GDP per capita barely changed (to $1,708 PPP and $650 nominal). You can use this earlier estimate if you prefer, but removing it altogether is unacceptable.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 19:27, 7 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whether the difference is "unusual" is irrelevant to the question of whether the per capital figure is "wrong". There is no doubt that the figure is, in fact, "wrong" based on the official census. The International Monetary Fund's (IMF) population estimate for 2012 was 47,142,648, which is 2,213,646 more than the 2012 census result of 44,929,002, a 4.9 percent discrepancy. The per capita GDP (PPP) based on the census would have been 1,643.90, not the IMF's erroneous 1,566.71. There is no cited proof that the IMF would ignore the results of the census. Therefore, the IMF's per capital figure is, in your terms, "unacceptable" and, in my terms, "inaccurate" and, therefore, "unencyclopedic". Should you wish any further discussion of this issue, take it to the article talk page, not here. AfricaTanz (talk) 02:42, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yemenia Airways

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Airports/page_content (bullet #7 please) and there is no Yemen Airways flights to Africa. You need to stop your nonsense editing or I will report you for vandalism! 68.119.73.36 (talk) 07:53, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are very wrong. Yemenia Airways also flies to Nairobi, Khartoum, Asmara, Cairo, Djibouti, Moroni, and Addis Ababa. All of those are in AFRICA. If you keep being incivil and/or harrassing on my talk page, you run the risk of being blocked. Your best bet is to stay away from here. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 12:38, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to the route map that Yemenia Airways publishes, it flies to the following airports in Africa: Addis Ababa, Asmara, Cairo, Dar es Salaam, Djibouti, Khartoum, Moroni, and Nairobi. It's good that you deleted your last incivil comment on this talk page. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 21:01, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to ITA, an extremely reliable source, all the routes listed in my last post are bookable on Yemenia Airways. So, the evidence is completely against your position. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 21:15, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You said in your thankfully deleted diatribe on this talk page: "Uhhhhh, if you look at Yemenia destinations page, you see that the airlines DOES NOT have any flights to Africa (the only destination in Africa served was Johannesburg but that has been terminated)." But Wikipedia simply cannot be a source for a Wikipedia article. Apart from that fact, the Wikipedia article lists several active destinations in Africa: Addis Ababa, Asmara, Cairo, Djibouti, Khartoum, and Nairobi. This article might be helpful to you: List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Africa. AfricaTanz (talk) 21:25, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's heartening to see, after all the aggressiveness you've shown in edit summaries and on this talk page, that you've recognized that Yemenia Airways flies to both Dar es Salaam and Nairobi. Maybe you'll be more cautious about hastily condemning editors in the future. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 12:04, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rant from Taroaldo

You do not seem to have the ability to interact well with other editors on Wikipedia. Now you appear to be stalking my talk page. You cannot make changes to text that I have added to my own talk page. Your behavior is unacceptable and you are not permitted to return to my talk page. Thank you. Taroaldo ✉ 00:38, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't talk trash about me on your talk page. You will have far fewer problems and will not risk being reported to ANI. You were already banned from mine. Remember? Did that stop you from posting here? Nope. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 00:49, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article titles

Hello AfricaTanz. I've noted that you've moved quite a number of article pages and in some cases, expanded the titles using brackets. May I suggest that you read this policy/guideline: Wikipedia:Article titles. Ali Fazal (talk) 15:15, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have read it. Refer to this language therein: "it is sometimes necessary to add distinguishing information, often in the form of a description in parentheses after the name." Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 20:40, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your Claim at WP:DRN

Hi! I'm EnglishEfternamn, and I am writing to let you know I am assessing your claim at WP:DRN. Regards. EnglishEfternamn _*t/c* 00:40, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. AfricaTanz (talk) 00:47, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AT! Just letting you know that I have read over what you said at DRN and again, I'm very sympathetic to your motivations. I think the mark of a good editor is wanting the article to be precise. But as I have said at DRN, I think we're in kind of a predicament and I don't think omitting IMF data is the way to go at this time. As before, I'm strongly suggesting you draw up a draft for a paragraph or two explaining the error, and we can put it in the article's "Economy" section. That way, reader's can take note that the info is in dispute from reliable sources, you get to look really smart as an editor, Underlying Ik would no longer have basis for a claim to edit warring, and the article's encyclopedic quality would not be compromised. To me, this is a win win situation. EnglishEfternamn _*t/c* 19:27, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to touch that article in this respect without Underlying lk's comments first. The last thing I want is another complaint from him with "higher authority". Aside from that, there is an ongoing discussion from new participants at DRN who are not in agreement - yet. I appreciate your efforts, however. AfricaTanz (talk) 20:04, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, just wanted to say thanks for being a good sport on the DRN case. Hopefully now we can improve the Tanzania article without delay.EnglishEfternamn _*t/c* 19:05, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ward article names

I still disagree with your proposed ward article names and have launched yet another move discussion at Talk:Rau ward, Tanzania. In particular I don't see how "Rau ward" is supported, much less required, by policy. Even WP:NCDAB and WP:NCGN are guidelines, not policies, and they don't support "Rau ward" anyway. Huon (talk) 01:47, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I really don't care that you and others want to be so appallingly user unfriendly about article names. The main point for THIS article is that Tanzania should not be in parentheses. I invite you to read the policy again. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 02:14, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You invite me to read what policy again? Anyway, you may want to have a look at my actual move request; while I don't see why a comma would be preferred to parentheses that's not what I disagree with, so we may well reach a compromise. Also, I'm not deliberately user unfriendly, I simply disagree with you on what's user friendly. Huon (talk) 02:26, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Insisting on "Rau" instead of "Rau ward" or, even better, "Rau ward, Tanzania" is irrefutably user unfriendly under any common sensical definition of the term. I await your compromise proposal. AfricaTanz (talk) 02:44, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I already wrote at the proposed move that I'd be okay with Rau, Tanzania, and you said that "The main point for THIS article is that Tanzania should not be in parentheses." How about me accepting that Tanzania won't be in parentheses and you accepting that we won't call it "Rau ward"?

I'd say insisting on needlessly long names not supported by the sources is user unfriendly, but I don't think we'll agree on what users actually prefer. Huon (talk) 03:36, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's hardly a compromise. You have no choice but to accept the policy you so often cite, that is, Tanzania cannot be in parentheses. What a complete joke to say that "Rau ward, Tanzania" is "needlessly long" and user unfriendly. Three words. Wow. AfricaTanz (talk) 04:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of the busiest airports in Africa / 2011 statistics

Hello. Why have you removed my contribution on the airport Kotoka Accra. Have you seen the references? They come from official sources (http://www.ghanairports.com.gh/statistics_new.html). You can check it. In the future make checks before haphazardly undo a contribution. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.248.73.210 (talk) 08:02, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Page moves

Please stop your page moves such as List of Sultans of Zanzibar to List of sultans of Zanzibar and List of Presidents of Tanganyika to List of presidents of Tanganyika. Though I happen to agree with your capitalization preferences, our Wikipedia:Manual of Style does not; please refer to the third bullet point of Wikipedia:Capitalization#Titles of people. The changes you are making are not consistent with other article titles.

Also, please stop your page moves such as Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Cooperatives to Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives, Tanzania. Again, your new titles are inconsistent with those of similar articles, and appear to violate the Manual of Style (specifically, WP:PRECISION and WP:NATURAL). —Psychonaut (talk) 14:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are not welcome on my talkpage because of long term harrassment; so, do not post here again. Aside from that, you are misinterpreting the sources you cited. The Tanzanian government spells its ministries as "Co-operative", not "Cooperative" (and "Co-operation", not "Cooperation"). Look it up. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 21:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd strongly suggest you propose page moves at the relevant talk pages first, via WP:Requested moves. Your opinion on page names commonly differs from the mainstream, and since page moves are rather complicated to revert, discussing them beforehand can avoid unnecessary work for all of us. Huon (talk) 20:48, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion is noted, but I strongly disagree, as you already know. AfricaTanz (talk) 21:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT Rights Pakistan

Hey I left the New York Times article for you as the citation. I hate cited it below but I re-cited it for you. Thanks for watching over the article :) Thereandnot (talk) 03:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The article has many problems and needs lots of work. It is not currently a high priority of mine because to do the article justice would necessitate doing almost nothing else on Wikipedia. AfricaTanz (talk) 03:16, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to work on it a bit and continue to clean it up. I have some expertise on the culture and LGBT issues. However, as you stated, this will require some serious research and time. Thereandnot (talk) 17:25, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look in and contribute here and there. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 01:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Zanzibar's climate classification

Please, read the discussion and thanks. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 19:47, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Article

http://thediplomat.com/the-pulse/2013/06/10/pakistan-lesbian-couple-wed-in-uk/ <--Wanted your thoughts about this and if there are non-blog based legitimate sources to confirm this one. Thereandnot (talk) 05:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kilimanjaro prom

[1] I have more if you need but I'm on a mobile now. RacerX¹¹ Talk to me^{Stalk me} 01:18, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't post article-specific information here. Post it on the article discussion page. AfricaTanz (talk) 04:01, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Airlineroute.net

Hi, Thanks for the notification about the discussion. Slasher-fun (talk) 08:28, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aegean Cairo Operation

Hi, I saw you changed my recent edit on Cairo International Airport. According to Aegean's booking system their ATH-CAI service has been postponed to December 21, 2013. You can check it here https://en.aegeanair.com/e-services/e-ticket/

You need to add the source to the article. AfricaTanz (talk) 22:47, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of country subdivisions by GDP over 100 billion US dollars

There have been complaints about your removal of sourced entries referring to French departements like Aquitaine etc. I have checked the source, and it turned out that this document consist of several separate Excel sheets (you can see the different tabs at the bottom of the Excel window). While the results are not listed on the very first page, there are other sheets inside called "PIB en valeur 2008-2011" and so on, that contain lists of GDPs for several French subdivisions. You might have missed those, so I can see why you removed the entries from the article, but they've now been restored, and so I wanted to leave you note about it. De728631 (talk) 18:21, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "very first page" of what? Given that you verified the sourcing, maybe you can describe the exact path you took to find, for instance, the data about England. AfricaTanz (talk) 02:02, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, I didn't check all references, so I don't know yet about England. This Excel file with French data however contains five pages or sheets of which the first one does not list the data shown in our article. Like I said above, you'll have to click on the tab labeled "PIB en valeur 2008-2011" to see a list of various French subdivisions and their GDP in millions of EUR. There is however a problem with the exchange rate between USD and EUR. The values in USD for French regions shown in our article are based on a rate of 1.3914 USD/EUR, and it's unclear where this rate comes from. The official rate on 2011-21-31 was 1.2959 USD/EUR [2], so we should adjust that. Alternatively one could use the yearly average exchange rate of the reference year. For 2011, the rate of USD/EUR was 1.3369 (=1/0.748) [3]. I'm going to open a thread at the article talk page. De728631 (talk) 13:49, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, you assumed I was incorrect or fibbing when I said I looked for the data and couldn't find the data about England? Not only did I look at the source provided by the user in question, I did a number of searches on my own before I deleted the data as unsourced. No one has yet found the data about England posted by this user. How is that possible? AfricaTanz (talk) 03:39, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Please remember also that verifiability does not always require direct weblinks to the source. In fact, many academic papers, which are deemed to be among the most reliable sources at Wikipedia, cannot be directly linked except for the abstract. Verifiability means that someone, i.e. not always the reader in the first place, must be able to verify the content of the source. "Do not reject sources just because they are hard or costly to access. If you have trouble accessing a source, others may be able do so on your behalf." De728631 (talk) 19:04, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know all about WP:VERIFY. I looked for the data at the link added by the editor in question and didn't find it. It was up to that editor to clarify. "Complaining" doesn't get anyone anywhere. Simply clarifying where the data exists would have been more than sufficient. There is constant vandalism to lists like this, most often from nationalistic editors and very often not discovered. Hence, we need to be extra vigilant in reviewing edits to these lists. AfricaTanz (talk) 01:22, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nairobi airport edit

East Africa Safari Air Express is no longer an airline, and as such, it does not provide scheduled service from Jomo Kenyatta anymore. The airline was grounded in November 2010 and was purchased by Fly540 in December 2010. (http://wolfganghthome.wordpress.com/2010/12/18/breaking-news-fly-540-takes-over-east-african-safari-air-express/) The airline was re-branded as Fly SAX in September 2012 (http://www.ch-aviation.ch/portal/airline.php?phrase=B5) and no longer flies scheduled service from Jomo Kenyatta, moving most of its ops to nearby Wilson Airport. (http://www.fly-sax.com/About/about-us.html). In fact, go on their Web site (http://www.fly-sax.com) and try to view a flight from Nairobi-Kenyatta. None will appear. They're all from Wilson. Fly SAX only operates charter flights out of Kenyatta. Blackwarrior (talk) 07:03, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can avoid problems like this by using a more informative edit summary that includes your source. And blogs are not proper sources on Wikipedia. AfricaTanz (talk) 07:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Akshay b patil impersonating as an administrator

Thank you for trying to keep Wikipedia free of vandalism and according to the guidelines. However, one or more edits you labeled as Not up to the Wikipedia guide lines and editing the names of the buildings in name of removing unsourced reference , such as the edit at List of tallest buildings and structures in South Asia, are not cosiders under Wikipedia policy. Wikipedia has a stricter definition of the unsourced reference than common usage, and mislabeling edits as unsourced reference can discourage newer editors. Please read and just remove the Cite reference and add cite reference needed, there is no need to remove the whole sentence or paragraph Thank you. This is with regards to the revert you performed [4]'

Akshay b patil (talk) 19:46, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How absurd. I have deleted information that is unsourced. Simple as that. If you want to reinstate the information, by all means re-add it with proper sourcing. And stop falsely impersonating as an administrator. Refer to this. AfricaTanz (talk) 19:51, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have never acted as a administrator, FYI because of your recent edit this. The Kohinoor Square which is fifth tallest building in Indian sub contient has become First tallest building and The Imperial (Mumbai) building which is tallest building in Indian sub contient is not even mentioned in the list, even the World Trade Center (Colombo) which was completed in 1996 is missing in the edits made by you, Please first think and then act.Akshay b patil (talk) 20:02, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You wrongfully impersonated yourself as an administrator, clearly. If those are not the tallest buildings, you should be able to easily find the sources to support your conception of which are the tallest. Forum discussions cannot be cited on Wikipedia. Source-less data cannot be included in Wikipedia. These are not complex concepts. AfricaTanz (talk) 20:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits on Bengal

I have noticed your edits on Bengal, you have removed much of the information with statement "unsourced". Let me tell you that what ever information you removed were basic information which needs no source as the are well known. After you removed much of the content, the article became half-dead! From your next time, Please don't do it without studying well about the subject. I was very disappointed! And try taking me positively. Thank you and Regards! বিজয় চক্রবর্তী (Bijoy Chokroborti) ✉ 15:44, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You need to study Wikipedia policy about sourcing. The policy is contrary to your post. If the deleted information is so obvious and well known, you should have no trouble finding reliable sources for it when you re-add it. If you re-add it without sources, it will be deleted again and you run the risk of being blocked. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 17:31, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You cant have cites for each and every sentence dude! for example you removed people in Bengal wear sari and dhoti - kurta, you want me to put a woman and a men's picture as a cite?, take me positive. Thank you! বিজয় চক্রবর্তী (Bijoy Chokroborti) ✉ 06:46, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You need to source what is unsourced, as Wikipedia policy plainly requires after unsourced material has been deleted. Should you re-add the material without sources, you could be blocked. You should not add a picture. Text sourcing is better. AfricaTanz (talk) 06:49, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is a very common well known, in this manner there will be 100000+ cites on a page! You cant have cites for each and every sentence dude! They are well known! বিজয় চক্রবর্তী (Bijoy Chokroborti) ✉ 06:56, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Exaggeration does not help your cause. AfricaTanz (talk) 07:10, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AfricaTanz, rather than deleting apparently uncontroversial material for the lack of reference, you can tag those sentences for citation needed. And even better, you can inform that you have tagged some sentences in the talk page of the article. Then you can wait for some time to see if the regular editors are taking care of those citation needed tags. Straight-forward deletion of sentences that do not have reference (especially when the sentences are not apparently controversial) is not constructive. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 23:09, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia policy, I choose to delete the unsourced material. Feel free to add it back accompanied by reliable sourcing. If the material is so "uncontroversial", you should have no trouble finding those sources. What's unconstructive is the vast amount of unsourced material in articles about India, Bangladesh, and Bengal, which is increasing at an alarming rate. The status quo is simply unacceptable. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 02:22, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion (especially blanket-deletion) is a step that comes after citation needed tagging, and discussion in the talk page. That is clearly stated in WP:V. Of course, in some cases deletion can be done right away ( such as BLP). Please read the policy sequentially, don't get over-zealous.--Dwaipayan (talk) 07:08, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are no longer welcome on this talk page. Do not post here again. Let's be totally clear about your disruption on the Bengal article. You have repeatedly reinserted unsourced material that has been challenged and deleted. All of it. Every last character. You have done this despite your self-admitted view that some of the material needs to be removed. You also have refused to add even one source when reinserting the material. You have done no editing whatsoever except add a very limited number of citation-needed tags. When you didn't have time to continue your efforts, you recruited someone else as your replacement and was incivil about me to boot. This replacement did exactly what you wanted and then requested page protection to preserve what the two of you have done. The diffs can be found here. AfricaTanz (talk) 19:55, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jubba Airways at Nairobi Airport

If you look at the first flight listed at that page, the flight from NBO to MGO is operated nonstop. 68.119.73.36 (talk) 21:40, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the airline's official timetables http://jubbaairways.com/nairobi-schedules.html from NBO and it is showing the airline operating 2 flights from Nairobi to Mogadishu nonstop. 68.119.73.36 (talk) 21:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Have you asked Jetstreamer whether an airline's official timetable is a proper and reliable source? AfricaTanz (talk) 22:19, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I never said it wasn't. I've always encouraged the use of official timetables.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 22:29, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unless, there is no timetable available. 68.119.73.36 (talk) 22:30, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say you had. But you like to go around telling everyone what is a proper source as if there were preexisting consensus about that, even when it's solely your opinion. But you always omit that last part. AfricaTanz (talk) 22:32, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disregard my opinion, then. There's a place in Wikipedia to raise any concern regarding the reliability of sources. Anyone commenting there will likely be not biased by any project.--Jetstreamer ^Talk 22:36, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ol Doinyo Lengai

I came to the article specifically wanting to find out in what continent this was located. That information wasn't listed. I added it. You remove it and call it unnecessary. That's awesome. Thanks. TEH (talk • contributions) 00:39, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know which continent Tanzania is in? Hint: not North America, South America, Asia, Europe, Australia, or Antarctica. And the article specifically states that the mountain is part of the "East African Rift". Where else would that be? Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 05:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I said I didn't know. People shouldn't have to infer that the mountain range is in Africa. It should be specifically called out. TEH (talk • contributions) 02:58, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They don't have to. And it is. AfricaTanz (talk) 14:43, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT rights in Senegal

Please don't start this again. 9,000+ characters of text that don't once mention Senegal or anything in Senegal, with no explanation tying the information into the situation in Senegal, amounts to hijacking an article for agenda-pushing purposes, solely for the purpose of expressing your feelings about what Senegal is supposed to be doing under international law. —Largo Plazo (talk) 22:15, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I notice you've been banning people from your talk page. Keep in mind that when you do that, you waive any claim you might otherwise have made later that people should have tried to resolve issues with you directly before taking them upstream for consideration by others. —Largo Plazo (talk) 22:39, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who has the agenda? Don't come back here. Cheers. AfricaTanz (talk) 18:16, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Report at the Administators' Noticeboard

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:AfricaTanz regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. —Largo Plazo (talk) 19:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't remove references from articles

Don't remove references from the articles as you did here. If you continue your disruptive editing, you'll be reported. --Zayeem ^(talk) 21:05, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How typical of you not to look at the obsolete and inaccurate references removed before complaining about their removal. Is there any edit of Bangladesh-related articles that you would accept? AfricaTanz (talk) 02:08, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you haven't noticed, I did accept some of your edits as I didn't remove some of your fact templates but removing the references and adding these templates there is surely not acceptable.--Zayeem ^(talk) 07:46, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, some of your templates are quite unnecessary as the contents are already verified in the lead or infobox. --Zayeem ^(talk) 07:57, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 2013

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Drmies (talk) 04:29, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Community-endorsed indefinite block, with more details available at the ANI thread started by Largoplazo on 11 November 2013. Drmies (talk) 04:31, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A permanent link to the ANI thread is here. EdJohnston (talk) 04:48, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

AfricaTanz (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This block illustrates the increasing dysfunctionality of Wikipedia and why good editors are disappearing.

I do not participate in the ANI discussions because it's the same people with the same agenda who start and perpetuate each of them and present obviously untrue allegations. Their philosophy is to go multiple times to the same well with the same trivial allegations until they finally get what they want.

I "block" unreasonable people from my talk page only after they have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they will not listen to reason or are here simply to harrass me, blocks which are totally consistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. (Take a look at the contributions to my talk page by people like User:Largoplazo, User:Alifazal, User:Psychonaut, User:Jenova20, User:Kmzayeem, User:Future Perfect at Sunrise, User:Taroaldo.)

The "charges" at ANI were false. (1) The charge that I did not participate at the dispute resolution noticeboard (DRN) about LGBT articles is false because I did not know that a proceeding there had been instituted, i.e., I was not notified. (2) The charge that I do not communicate could have been seen to be false by a simple 10 second check of my talk/discussion page contributions in various places and my participation in other DRN proceedings, including at the talk page of the edit warrior who jealously and zealously guards the Chittagong article and others related to Bangladesh (User:Kmzayeem). (3) The charge that I violated an RFC about "LGBT articles in XXXX" is false, too, as a simple check of that RFC versus the recent, limited, completely sourced, and specific edits I've made to one of those articles would have proven. Have a look at LGBT rights in Ghana. What exactly is the problem with that article? Where is the synthesis? What are the novel theories? How is anything there unrelated to Ghana? Also have a look at LGBT rights in Senegal. What exactly is the problem with that article? Where is the synthesis? What are the novel theories? How is anything there unrelated to Senegal? (4) The charge that I insist on the Ghana article reading a certain way is patently false, as this diff clearly shows. (5) The assertion at ANI by User:Largoplazo that "User:TransporterMan suggested we could go to Rfc/U or here. Since AfricaTanz declines to participate and won't listen to anybody...." is a complete fabrication.

My inclination is that (unless someone can point out where it has occurred) that this listing is premature. If AfricaTanz/IP shows indicates willingness to discuss the matter, that discussion should take place on one or more article talk pages. (Pick one and put pointers to that discussion on the others if it involves common issues; use individual pages if the issue is unique to those pages.) ... One of the problems which I feel that AfricaTanz's opponents must face is that it is, in my opinion, unlikely that they will get very far with the generalized argument, "You're engaging in OR/synthesis. Stop it." (Indeed, when expressed in a generalized manner like that it becomes, in my opinion, a conduct issue, not a content issue, because it focuses on what the editor is doing, rather than what s/he has done: that is, it focuses on the editor, not his/her edits.) If AfricaTanz chooses to engage in discussion, the only productive (if time-consuming and labor-intensive) thing to do, again in my opinion, is then go back and work on one individual instance of alleged OR/synthesis at a time.... Please note that I am not adjudging in this comment that AfricaTanz has done anything wrong; I have not examined that question and neither have nor express any opinion about it at this point in time. I am merely giving my opinion about what his/her opponents ought to do if the allegations against him/her are supportable, and only saying that much in connection with what I think ought to happen to this listing.

Did User:Largoplazo or User:Psychonaut actually do what User:TransporterMan suggested? Of course not. Their goal was to block me, and they finally succeeded.

The person who instituted the false ANI (User:Largoplazo), unlike me, has uniformly refused to compromise about the LGBT articles. It was his-way-or-no-way. Have a look at this rant by User:Largoplazo. He and User:Psychonaut then did nothing when User:Bobrayner deleted on 11 November 2013 everything about these countries' obligations under international law, even when sourced 100 percent. Clearly, this has been their objective the whole time.

Earlier this year, I tried very hard to accommodate their objection to repeating information in LGBT articles, only for User:Psychonaut to thwart that effort by getting the article I created for this purpose deleted. The only reasonable inference that can be drawn from all of this is that these two editors in particular object to the content ("I don't like it") and dream up excuses to get the content omitted.

But of course none of these diffs were checked. None of the allegations were actually verified. The persons who have been so unsuccessful in past ANIs have been rewarded now purely because of their persistence. Is the goal to drive away the productive editors in favor of those who make the most noise and are the most unreasonable? AfricaTanz (talk) 00:50, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I don't see a single word in there that constitutes an unblock request. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 01:29, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

AfricaTanz (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Sorry for the apparent breach of unblocking-request-protocol. I thought using the unblock template was enough. Please unblock. This block illustrates the increasing dysfunctionality of Wikipedia and why good editors are disappearing. I do not participate in the ANI discussions because it's the same people with the same agenda who start and perpetuate each of them and present obviously untrue allegations. Their philosophy is to go multiple times to the same well with the same trivial allegations until they finally get what they want. I "block" unreasonable people from my talk page only after they have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they will not listen to reason or are here simply to harrass me, blocks which are totally consistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. (Take a look at the contributions to my talk page by people like User:Largoplazo, User:Alifazal, User:Psychonaut, User:Jenova20, User:Kmzayeem, User:Future Perfect at Sunrise, User:Taroaldo.) The "charges" at ANI were false. (1) The charge that I did not participate at the dispute resolution noticeboard (DRN) about LGBT articles is false because I did not know that a proceeding there had been instituted, i.e., I was not notified. (2) The charge that I do not communicate could have been seen to be false by a simple 10 second check of my talk/discussion page contributions in various places and my participation in other DRN proceedings, including at the talk page of the edit warrior who jealously and zealously guards the Chittagong article and others related to Bangladesh (User:Kmzayeem). (3) The charge that I violated an RFC about "LGBT articles in XXXX" is false, too, as a simple check of that RFC versus the recent, limited, completely sourced, and specific edits I've made to one of those articles would have proven. Have a look at LGBT rights in Ghana. What exactly is the problem with that article? Where is the synthesis? What are the novel theories? How is anything there unrelated to Ghana? Also have a look at LGBT rights in Senegal. What exactly is the problem with that article? Where is the synthesis? What are the novel theories? How is anything there unrelated to Senegal? (4) The charge that I insist on the Ghana article reading a certain way is patently false, as this diff clearly shows. (5) The assertion at ANI by User:Largoplazo that "User:TransporterMan suggested we could go to Rfc/U or here. Since AfricaTanz declines to participate and won't listen to anybody...." is a complete fabrication.

My inclination is that (unless someone can point out where it has occurred) that this listing is premature. If AfricaTanz/IP shows indicates willingness to discuss the matter, that discussion should take place on one or more article talk pages. (Pick one and put pointers to that discussion on the others if it involves common issues; use individual pages if the issue is unique to those pages.) ... One of the problems which I feel that AfricaTanz's opponents must face is that it is, in my opinion, unlikely that they will get very far with the generalized argument, "You're engaging in OR/synthesis. Stop it." (Indeed, when expressed in a generalized manner like that it becomes, in my opinion, a conduct issue, not a content issue, because it focuses on what the editor is doing, rather than what s/he has done: that is, it focuses on the editor, not his/her edits.) If AfricaTanz chooses to engage in discussion, the only productive (if time-consuming and labor-intensive) thing to do, again in my opinion, is then go back and work on one individual instance of alleged OR/synthesis at a time.... Please note that I am not adjudging in this comment that AfricaTanz has done anything wrong; I have not examined that question and neither have nor express any opinion about it at this point in time. I am merely giving my opinion about what his/her opponents ought to do if the allegations against him/her are supportable, and only saying that much in connection with what I think ought to happen to this listing.

Decline reason:

Repeating an unblock request that was already declined is at best obtuse and at worst abusive. Two hints for you: first, don't blame everyone else, and, second, make it shorter. Bbb23 (talk) 04:41, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your verbatim repetition of a declined unblock request is oddly reminiscent of some of the kind of edits that got you blocked in the first place. Drmies (talk) 04:24, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That comment borders on abusive. Please refer to the below for the explanation. AfricaTanz (talk) 10:44, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

AfricaTanz (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

With all due respect, the only stated reason the first unblock request was declined is because I did not specifically request to be unblocked. That is an irrefutable fact. So, I asked again and included the request that was absent from the first request. Seriously, what else would you have me do? AfricaTanz (talk) 4:26 am, Today (UTC−6)

Decline reason:

This is your last chance. Either begin to address what your part is in these disputes, or stop making requests to be unblocked. If you make another abusive unblock request, your talk page access may be revoked. Krakatoa Katie 14:20, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

FALSE ACCUSATION by AfricaTanz

I'd like to to categorically deny and state for the record that at no time whatsoever have I "harassed" this user (psychologically or otherwise) during the course of my interaction with him/her. These allegations at best are absurd and fail to prove beyond reasonable doubt this user's assertion, as evidenced by his/her comments: 1, 2, 3 and 4. It's nice to learn that you're on a long term vacation (lucky you!) – i'm sure it'll do you good. I understand it's late but nevertheless I'd like to wish you Bon voyage! for your second annual retreat. Ali Fazal (talk) 01:15, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sock Puppetry

Let it be known to other users that there was a sock puppetry investigation conducted against this blocked user: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AfricaTanz/Archive; almost after a year of his/her own voluntary staycation from Wikipedia; but has since decided to return back using a plethora of IP address ranges. Here we go again. Ali Fazal (talk) 11:09, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]