I see that you are Swahili, so maybe your main interest is East+Central Africa. But we could meet mid-way in a sense. The Amazigh history of the southern Maghreb is also heavily lacking from Wikipedia. Sahara, Sahel, and West Africa are overlapping between Amazigh and Niger-congo tribes, and theres a lot of shared history there.
Soooooooo many kingdoms, tribes, cities, notable people etc, of the Sahara, Sahel and West Africa generally are totally lacking. I am down to collaborate on this. I'm not seeing a large Amazigh editing community here so why not collabIdris Shirazi (talk)22:00, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
HiIdris Shirazi, I'm not Swahili, I just speak a tiny bit. I'm interested in the whole continent but tend to work most often on Central and Southern Africa because that's where our coverage seems to be worst (though none of it is brilliant). I'd be very happy to collab on some articles, are there particular ones you have in mind? I can ping some people that may be interestedKowal2701 (talk)22:26, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The Mali Empire article might be a good place to start, because its not barebones, theres a ton of information out there on Mali, and it was an intersection point between North and Central Africa. The wikipedia article has good stuff in there already, but the problem is that it reads like a disorganized trivia rather than an article. It could use a LOT of new images, new information, new everything.
The Mali Empire article isn't "bad", but compare it to something likeRoman Empire. We need to bring every single African empire to the same or greater quality. Mali Empire is easy because there is so much out there.
But theres also a lot of other exciting topics like
We're going to really struggle to improveMali Empire to that standard, there just isn't the same quality of sourcing available and a lot of it is in French.Catjacket's written a lot of it. Though there's definitely need for polishing of articles likeMali Empire to get it togood article level. I've been treating articles likeSultanate of Agadez as higher priority where they're pretty much empty, or ones without an article likeDraft:Lozi Kingdom, but I'd be up for working onMali Empire (Songhai Empire needs a lot of work as well), even moreso if Catjacket's down for it (he can read French!)Kowal2701 (talk)23:55, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ohhh forget I said Mali Empire you're right, we should prioritize barebones ones. How do we make a collaborative list that anyone can add to of barebones/non existent articles in the Sahara/Sahel/West Africa? If you can make a list like that, and we can add to it any time we find a new trash article, that would be nice. I can also read French, so its no problem, if you find a French source, tell me about it and ill find it online and translateIdris Shirazi (talk)00:16, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You can have a look atList of kingdoms and empires in African history (I wrote it with the idea people could use it to manage our coverage, but that was before I knew that there's very few people working on these topics lol), see if there's any that interest you that have a lot of room for improvement (it can be North Africa if you like)Kowal2701 (talk)00:23, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will lock in on the Sultanate of Agadez one you linked. Believe me, in a few days from now it will be a whole different article. But i have to study now sadlyIdris Shirazi (talk)00:28, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Idris Shirazi, nice to meet you. Welcome to the party! Like Kowal2701, I also prioritize areas w/ sparse or bad coverage, rather than spend a bunch of time on pages like the Mali Empire, although I have done a lot of work trying to clean it up, get higher quality sources, etc in the past. Unfortunately as you know African history just doesn't get the attention it deserves, especially from experienced and committed editors. A lot of content comes from unreliable blogs or people pushing angles, often ethnocentric ones. So basically if you ever want help or feedback on any article you're working on, please hit me up, I'd be happy to help and Wikipedia needs good editors on these topics.
That being said, I think taking the Mali Empire article to good status would be a worthy project and is totally possible. I cannot take the lead on lead this, but I have done a LOT of relevant research that could be used to replace some of the shoddy sourcing. Sources are, like Kowal2701 said, somewhat tricky. But as long as we have a section addressing some of the shortcomings in the historiography I think we can get to good article status.Catjacket (talk)19:33, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to meet you also, I am glad to join this party, together we are going to revolutionize African wikipedia.
Yes imagine Mali at FA status, thats 100% possible. For right now I am collecting sources on the Sultanate of Agadez. I just downloaded a pdf from Johannes Nicolaisen which is a complete goldmine. Johannes was an anthropologist who spent years on the ground with the Tuareg of the Sahara desert, and theres a lot of info on the Sultanate of Agadez there.
By the way, do you think its worthwhile to try to get Berber moved to Amazigh? Berber literally means barbarian, so its not wikipedia neutral, but theres probably never been many Amazigh editors to press this issue. Is it worth a try or do you think itll get shut down?Idris Shirazi (talk)05:34, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There wasa similar discussion pretty recently, so it's not worth bringing up again. Until there's a real movement among Amazigh people to advocate for the abandonment of the word Berber (in life in general, not just on Wikipedia), then 'Berber' will probably remain the most common name and so the one that matchesWikipedia policy.Catjacket (talk)15:47, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, was just about to comment the same.Ngrams shows "Amazigh" closing in on "Berbers", but it's not there yet.WP:COMMONNAME usually determines what we title our articles. Maybe if there's lots of advocacy groups saying it's derogatoryKowal2701 (talk)15:54, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For francophone sources, check out Cairn, Persee.fr, and the Bibliotheque nationale de France, gallica.fr. Cairn requires Wikipedia library access.Catjacket (talk)19:36, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seems lots of editors are asking you to strike a portion of your comment at the iar talk page, and in terms of civility it probably would be a good idea. No reason to muddy the discussion with stuff that other editors will then comment on which takes it off track. Thanks.Randy Kryn (talk)01:12, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That discussions still going?! Sure, I would’ve struck earlier if said user had asked me to since it matters most how comments are received, and less incentivised to do so when two of the people are Sanger and ATMNKowal2701 (talk)01:23, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the discussion has gone on way too long and hopefully will be ended soon. I didn't notice if you were pinged or not, which you should have been if anyone mentions another editor in that kind of context (asking them to strike a comment). Thanks for your attention about a discussion on such long-term policy.Randy Kryn (talk)01:36, 23 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Kowal2701. Please check your email; you've got mail! Message added 17:01, 30 November 2025 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You canremove this notice at any time by removing the{{You've got mail}} or{{ygm}} template.
Berbers and Copts have lighter skin, straighter hair, and different facial features to other Native African ethnic groups, so Berbers and Copts are not Black.~2025-38545-90 (talk)00:02, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kowal , I think I am set to draft orombo within few weeks . What type of images can we add in the article . Is it necessary to add images? Also is there any more topic that i can work on ?Miamiller777 (talk)17:54, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
HiMiamiller777, you don't have to add images, but some you could add are:
For help adding images for articles, seeHelp:Pictures. Thumbnails are the most common format, the code for it is[[File:Name of file|thumb|Write the caption here]].
There's loads of topics to work on, just depends what you're interested in :) You can write about anything, improving/rewriting existing articles is just as important as creating new ones.Kowal2701 (talk)19:59, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah that’ll be okay, what determines whether we ought to have an article isnotability, and the criteria for most topics is "significant coverage in reliable sources" (WP:GNG). It’s a little subjective, but like even one book solely on the topic would be fine, in this case a couple of high quality sources discussing it in depth is fine. (Also notability is relative to all available sources outside wikipedia, not just sources in an article. Though 3 sources in an article usually means it’s safe from deletion)Kowal2701 (talk)21:33, 14 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Talk:Sexual and gender-based violence in the October 7 attacks
I know that this subject can be biased and controversial, please rememberWP:AGF. Any accusations or implications without proof are grounds for disciplinary action. Even when I walk that fine line I make sure to link examples and proof, even to apologize if I was wrong or if I overstep.
I'm not accusing you of anything but please be careful of tone, I absolutely understand where you are coming from and I don't disagree with your frustration.
I didn’t make any accusations nor personalise anything. Sometimes things need to said (or in this case implied) frankly instead of gaming policies, and it gives people the chance to check themselves rather than let it build to an AE case. The discussion isn’t heated so I’m sure it can take itKowal2701 (talk)18:14, 19 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Kowal2701,So I was going through the page [African Philosphy] and saw that a page for "K.C. Anyanwu" is not yet created . I think since he have defined the philosophies in many way , It would be much better to create a page for him, However do you think that it passes WP: Notability ? I didnt find much sources.Miamiller777 (talk)19:01, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also in the same page , "The list of African philosophers" is listed as a sub topic and I believe currently there is no page for that,If it is so, I think it can be made into a separate page , I have seen many such pages for similar topics. Would like to know your opinion regarding the same.Miamiller777 (talk)19:04, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Drafts that go unedited for six months are eligible for deletion, in accordance with ourdraftspace policy, and this one has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simplyedit the submission, and remove the{{db-afc}},{{db-draft}}, or{{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you read this, you canrequest its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the draft so you can continue to work on it.
Hello, I'mQwerfjkl (bot). I haveautomatically detected thatthis edit performed by you, on the pagePedi people, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Amissing title error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix |Ask for help)
I couldn't get a definite report out of theHive AI-generated content detector but it did identifyportions of the newly-added content as highly likely to be AI-generated. –Skywatcher68 (talk)15:02, 30 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read my book summary? And what is the difference if I submit an article for myself vs a book i wrote on a page about the BOOK my book is paying homage to, revisiting the issues addressed by the author of the original 1965 Neocolonialism book? If I can't edit in my honor an homage to this page, am i only allowed to create a new article for my book only, and refernece nkrumahs neocolonialism in that article? please advise.Rodney Puplampu (talk)01:45, 7 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Kowal2701. I don't know if any of the pages you currently watch are under pending changes, but if not I'm sure you'll come across this eventually. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you toreview other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located atSpecial:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located atSpecial: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.
I need your help i dont know how to put this in Dispute resolution board or report to an admin. I want to post this message.
The issue began when the editor [[User:MTLNORG|MTLNORG]] claimed that the article (Mount Kenya region) attributes Mount Kenya to a single tribe and proceeded to remove approximately 90% of the content. From the context, it appeared that they were referring to the Kikuyu community. I pointed out that the article clearly includes five different tribes.Subsequently, the editor shifted their claim, arguing that the article attributes the region to a single ethnolinguistic group, specifically stating that Nilotic communities were excluded. On this basis, they again removed the majority of the article content. I explained that the Mount Kenya region is predominantly Bantu and that, if they felt Nilotic groups were underrepresented, they could have added relevant content rather than deleting most of the article, especially considering that Nilotic groups form a minority in the region. The editor did not respond.I then added sourced content acknowledging the presence of the Maasai in the region, which the editor reverted without explanation. After further attempts to seek clarification on the Talk page received no response, the editor introduced a new claim regarding inadequate sourcing. I explained that the existing sources were sufficient or close to sufficient, and that if they believed otherwise, they could have initiated discussion or applied an appropriate maintenance template such as {{More citations needed}}. No discussion followed.The editor then changed their rationale again, stating in the edit summary that the Mount Kenya region is not an administrative region. I responded that the article does not state that Mount Kenya is an administrative unit, and that the term “region” is used in its geographical and socio-economic sense. This concern was then abandoned.The editor further claimed that the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS) does not recognize the Mount Kenya region as a statistical entity. I clarified that the article explicitly states that the data presented is an aggregate of the ten constituent counties rather than county-level figures. Additionally, numerous reputable sources and media outlets refer to Mount Kenya as a recognized geopolitical region.Throughout this process, the editor has repeatedly removed large portions of sourced content and raised shifting objections in edit summaries without engaging in meaningful discussion, making collaboration and consensus difficult to achieve.
HiAnyrmson, the first thing you need to do is notify MTLNORG of the ANI discussion as it says at the top ofWP:ANI. I've read through the dispute, MTLNORG is a fairly new editor and won't be familiar with policies and guidelines, but they should have gone to the talk page to discuss perWP:BRD instead of reverting again. At the same time, you should have warned them aboutedit warring, and while you did start the discussion on their talk page, it is better to use article talk pages for disputes about content and save user talk pages for ones about conduct (as perWP:DR).
On the dispute itself, I'm not going to engage substantively to stay clear ofcanvassing, but I think they were okay with the removal of unsourced statistics, but they also removed sourced content without really explaining (guidance atWP:CRV). I'll comment at ANIKowal2701 (talk)17:35, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
On31 January 2026,Did you know was updated with a fact from the articleLozi Kingdom, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was... that the kingship ideology of theLozi Kingdom emphasised powerful ancestral royal spirits, believed to affect the present? The nomination discussion and review may be seen atTemplate:Did you know nominations/Lozi Kingdom. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page(here's how,Lozi Kingdom), and the hook may be added tothe statistics page after its run on the Main Page has completed. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free tonominate it.
Youreverted my edit, pointing to MOS:VAR saying not to change existing style. You perhaps forgot that the editor who violated that by changing existing style wasyou. However, I'm going to drop this. Have a nice day.Peter Gulutzan (talk)01:09, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Mb, I guess the reason I changed it was because a) sources tend to use CE/BCE and b) don't think it's appropriate to use BC/AD for non-Christian-related topics, but also it is just preference. Btw, why were you looking at a version from 2007?Kowal2701 (talk)01:35, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I saw your use of the{{admin help}} template at AINB. I definitely support this general approach, but prefer Newslinger's suggestion here[1]. I think we will have more success flagging cases at AINB for admins who are already patrolling AINB than by summoning random admins to the noticeboard. I've been out of the country for work for weeks so I haven't acted on Newslinger's suggestion, any chance you'd want to? Also I normally would have posted this directly on the AINB thread but I think you can probably guess why I didn't want to on this occasion. Thanks as always for the work on LLM stuff, I saw you going through the open cases and I appreciate it.NicheSports (talk)18:57, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks (I'm just moral support tho lol). I wonder whether we could have something similar toTemplate:@ITNA. It doesn't really work for ITN because they get too many pings, but maybe for AINB it'd be good? I could have a go at editing{{AIC status}}, but it's probably safer to ask @Chaotic EnbyKowal2701 (talk)19:13, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely support the idea, go at it! It does actually work decently well for ITN, as I manage to filter out the pings that matter to me me (blurbs that I'm not already involved in) and tune out the others (RD and/or blurbs I already !voted on).ChaoticEnby (talk ·contribs)19:16, 7 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'd rather make ANI reports if only for visibility. It's beneficial to have constant and very public displays showing that this LLM issue isn't getting better on it's own, it'll continue to shift editor sentiment and make it easier to address the problem.fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk)02:42, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
We can still do that, no problem. And some cases have to go to ANI no matter what. It will be good to have another option though. Some of us are getting ANI fatigue, and sometimes (such as with Hmlarson, which still needs action on perms) it's best to do it in a lower visibility place anyways.NicheSports (talk)05:12, 8 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I closed the merge request on Holocaust survivor Palestine advocacy despite merge consensus in order to allow for an RfD as you requested. Do you plan to initiate it or should I?
Yeah you can't remove those images they've been here since 2023 more then a year you can't remove them just because you've arbitrarily decided that they aren't important.
Thanks for discussing.WP:IMGCONTENT saysThe purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, usually by directly depicting people, things, activities, and concepts described in the article. The relevant aspect of the image should be clear and central.
They give the reader a general idea of what Monomotapa looked like their are very very few sources and images on this empire so any imagery on it is welcomed
Another thing these images are so rare on the web that alot of them can now only be viewed on wikipedia, and being the only visualization for a long gone empire it is incredibly important that they stayYepitsthatguyagain (talk)23:14, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Seepg 24, Mutapa covered an area smaller than modern-day Zimbabwe (Mudenge has it includingButua which recent scholars don't). I don't think they give the reader any idea of what Mutapa was like. We have plenty of articles pre-photography which do fine without lots of images. All these images are on Commons, so when someone searches Google Images for any of the words in their Commons entry they come up. It isn't necessary to put them in an article.Kowal2701 (talk,contribs)00:10, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That is a revision made in 1988 which aims to discredit the legitimacy of monomotapa as nothing more then a tribal kingdom
I have already provided my sources you choosing to be coy does not invalidate that
You neither have the authourity nor liberty to make those decision on the behalf of everyone before you " I don't think " is not a valid reason for raiding a page .Yepitsthatguyagain (talk)01:10, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
What? It’s by a professional historian from Zimbabwe, it was the first and is the only comprehensive scholarly work about Mutapa. He thought the state was hundreds of thousands of km2.David Beach (historian) thought it was smaller. "I don’t think" is a perfectly good reason, you don’town that page.Kowal2701 (talk,contribs)01:23, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
HiAllthemilescombined1, first off, well done for asking someone first. I think it'd be a bad idea since you had a couple blocks for violating the tban, the last being 27 November, that would probably be enough for admins to vote against. I'm not one, but I think admins are partly looking for self-discipline in following rules, and good behaviour in other topics while tbanned. I wouldn't recommend appealing until 6 months after the last tban vio, so around April 2026 (and in your appeal acknowledge and apologise for the tban vios, while also acknowledging the issues that led to the tban). Good luckKowal2701 (talk,contribs)01:11, 11 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=link}
Hello, I'mQwerfjkl (bot). I haveautomatically detected thatthis edit performed by you, on the pagePedi people, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
