Moret8391
September 2023
edit
Hello, I'm Grumpylawnchair. I noticed that you recently removed content from Slavery in Somalia without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 19:28, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did at Amhara people, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:59, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
I didn’t. And I did mentioned why. Amhara identity was well documented for centuries. Yet the current page (which is taking its sources from well biased modern scholars) is making it seem like it never existed. Which in fact it did. Moret8391 (talk) 13:07, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- Your edit summary was rather unclear at best. If you think that the scholarly sources cannot be used for some reason, please start a discussion on the talk page. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:33, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, all I did was to show/represent primary Historical sources of the existence of Amhara identity, which prior to my edit the page seem to question/dismiss it and do they doing so by showing newly sources from the last decade of the 20th century and the 21 century, by so-called ‘scholars’ of Ethiopians (which most are not of Amhara origin) who clearly have biased views. Moret8391 (talk) 15:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has a strong preference for use of secondary sources over primary ones, and there's no requirements for the authors of sources about a topic to have a particular ethnicity. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:56, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- questing the identity of 30 million people? Making it seem like it never existed? If anyone Wants to edit something on the matter he can go ahead. I rest my case. Moret8391 (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think you've understood what the sources are arguing, but please feel free to present your case on the article's talk page. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:07, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- questing the identity of 30 million people? Making it seem like it never existed? If anyone Wants to edit something on the matter he can go ahead. I rest my case. Moret8391 (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has a strong preference for use of secondary sources over primary ones, and there's no requirements for the authors of sources about a topic to have a particular ethnicity. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:56, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, all I did was to show/represent primary Historical sources of the existence of Amhara identity, which prior to my edit the page seem to question/dismiss it and do they doing so by showing newly sources from the last decade of the 20th century and the 21 century, by so-called ‘scholars’ of Ethiopians (which most are not of Amhara origin) who clearly have biased views. Moret8391 (talk) 15:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
Introduction to contentious topics
edit
You have recently edited a page related to the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes), a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.
A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.
Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:
- adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
- comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
- follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
- comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
- refrain from gaming the system.
Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.