1

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present.

Hi Skllagyook, If you would like to delete/clear Some of the language section that We (or I) added a few years ago (I.E Coopers Opinion) That Would be fine (that's if you want to),I admit now at the time I was more aggressively pursuing the AA theory/Origin of Meroitic because of a Female Linguist I knew who was strong in her AA origin opinion of Meroitic (The linguist is not Rowan BTW) I knew this linguist for years, Meroitic can be either language family (Eastern Sudanic or AA) their is a split Opinion among actual current Linguist/researchers who've worked/Published papers on Meroitic (Rowan & Lipinski on one side & Claude riley on the other) but the Linguistic community as a whole seems to lean towards Eastern Sudanic & of the 3 Claude riley I must admit has done the most Research/work/Published the most papers into the topic, apologies for any inconvenience I may have caused. Jedorton (talk) 16:43, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jedorton What is there now (including Cooper, as well as Rilly and Berchaus-Gerst) explicitly mentions/discusses Kerma and its language and is appropriate and not WP:OR. Theres does not seem to be problem currently. Skllagyook (talk) 16:53, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I just thought I may have "Clogged" up/overdone the language section for the average reader,Jedorton (talk) 16:56, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jedorton I initially thought you were referring to the Kerma page but them realized you were probably referring to the Meroitic page. So this was my revised response (but you replied before I could post it above:

"What is on the Meroitic page now (including Cooper - who supports the East Sudanic theory- as well as Rilly, Rowan, etc) explicitly mentions/discusses Meroitic and its language and is appropriate and not WP:OR. (Cooper discuss both Kerma's language and Meroitic, but some others do not.) There does not seem to be problem currently."

To your reply, I do not think the sections on either page are clogged or overly long. From what I remember, they ,seem to give an adequate and functional overview of what the research puts forth. But I will look over it. Skllagyook (talk) 17:06, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I was referring to the Kerma culture language section, I thought I may have caused you to make it overly long, But I agree with you it's detailed and fine and Yes Cooper agrees with Rilly that Meroitic is Eastern Sudanic, & has published Great work on Ancient Sudan, So his work should be displayed as well Jedorton (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We can't rely on an appeal to an Authority from (Cooper, as well as Rilly and Berchaus-Gerst), Meroitic obviously shares cognates between various semitic languages (see lipinski) add in to the Fact that recent Genetic ( information From Kadruka ties them in with Cushitic speakers in savanna pastoral Neolithic,

"Petrous bones and teeth are the skeletal elements most often targeted by researchers for ancient DNA (aDNA) extraction, and the sources of the majority of previously published ancient African genomes. However, the high temperature environments that characterise much of Africa often lead to poor preservation of skeletal remains. Here, we successfully reconstruct and analyse genome-wide data from the naturally mummified hair of a 4000-year-old individual from Sudan in northeastern Africa, after failed attempts at DNA extraction from teeth, petrous, and cranium of this and other individuals from the site of Kadruka. We find that hair DNA extracted with an established single-stranded library protocol is unusually enriched in ultra-short DNA molecules and exhibits substantial interior molecular damage. The aDNA was nonetheless amenable to genetic analyses, which revealed that the genome is genetically indistinguishable from that of early Neolithic eastern African pastoralists located 2500 kilometres away. Our findings support established models for the southwards dispersal of Middle Nile Valley pastoral populations to the Rift Valley of eastern Africa, and provide the first direct evidence for a genetic source population for this dispersal. Our study highlights the value of mummified hair as an alternate source of aDNA from regions with poor bone preservation.''

Show More

Rilly once claimed The C-Group were Eastern Sudanic speakers and has been critized by the wider linguistic community For his position on Meroitic. Jedorton (talk) 22:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jedorton Kedruka is not Kerma or Meroe; it's a site significantly further north from both. Furthermore, it's only a single sample. In addition to that, the genetic affinity of a group doesn't necessary closely follow its linguistic affinity. Making inferences about the latter from the former (or vice versa) in our edits, when those conclusions are not explicit in the source(s) would be WP:OR, which is against Wikipedia policy. We do follow "authority", those being the explicit statements of WP:RS. Skllagyook (talk) 08:16, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Both the kerma and ultimately the Meroitic culture derive from further North, given that the pre kerma culture comes from the North being derived from the A-Group culture

It looks like the pre kerma culture are likley A-Group migrants,

"Pre-Kerma closely related to the A-Group about 3500 - 2200 BC" https://www.ucl.ac.uk/museums-static/digitalegypt/nubia/kerma.html

and there are more university published sources, Now i agree with you  the genetic affinity of a group doesn't necessarily correlate with the language spoken by said group, But Meroitic is an unclassified language with a complicated history. Jedorton (talk) 17:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Author is not an expert in a relevant field. See here https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Desmond-Ayim-Aboagye?_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIn19 Also, the claim that the Akan originate in Egypt or Mesopotamia is a WP:FRINGE extraordinary claim fulfilling much of WP:REDFLAG Also, Aboagye does not seem to mention any Akan oral traditions of Egyptian origin in his paper. The conclusion is based on his reasoning

The problems with this addition have been explained to you by two editors now(fringe, non-expert, does not mention an oral tradition of Egyptian origin). See my edit summaries. There is no WP:CONSENSUS for this. You continue to reinstate it without explanation and edit war. Additions on Wikipedia require reliable sources/WP:RS per Wikipedia policy. It's against policy to edit based on personal opinion. If you continue I will have to report you.

And even if he does make that claim there, the opinion of one individual (even an Asantehene) is not enough to constitute the oral tradition of a people, and certainly does not supersede the opinions/research of actual contemporary specialist scholars in the relevant fields - history anthropology, linguistics, archaeology, etc. In reliable published sources (who do not advance any kind of Egyptian origin theory nor seem to take such an idea seriously - hence the reason it is fringe), and is not a reliable

These are just your false opinions. Now The author is an expert in a relevant field. He is not making up stuff. It's actually you And even if he does make that claim there, the opinion of one individual (even an Asantehene) is not enough to constitute the oral tradition of a people, and certainly does not supersede the opinions/research of actual contemporary specialist scholars in the relevant fields - history anthropology, linguistics, archaeology, etc. In reliable published sources (who do not advance any kind of Egyptian origin theory nor seem to take such an idea seriously - hence the reason it is fringe), and is not a reliable

This just shows you believe in false concepts and it's just your personal opinion. I will get moderator to help with conclusion if you don't stop being bias and unfair, and being dishonest. I will at least show Akan oral history which states they come from Egypt and Mesopotamia. Kanimankwesi (talk) 00:04, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kanimankwesi. It is better to have these kinds of discussion on the relevant Talk pages, not on my, or other user's personal Talk pages. But both I another user, User:MiddleOfAfrica, have already explained these issues with you. A professor of the psychology of religion is not an expert in the origins on an ethnic group (experts in population genetics, archaeology, history, and linguistics would be examples of relevant experts.). Wikipedia has rules regarding what constitute reliable sources (WP:RS). Skllagyook (talk) 03:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you've contributed a lot to Igbo people, would you be interested in a taskforce on oral tradition? Kowal2701 (talk) 19:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2024 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]