Benutzer Diskussion:Utzernameusername

Lieber Benutzer

Bitte beachte, dass ein Artikel – wie Somalia – nicht zu viele Bilder enthalten sollte!

Kannst du zudem begründen, weshalb das kleine und nicht sehr ansehnliche Bild einer Frau dem vorherigen Bild vorzuziehen sein soll?

Gruß, Amphibium

Dear Utzernameusername

Image:Somali children.JPEG is IMHO of far better quality than Image:Young Somali woman in Mogadishu.jpg.

In general, an article shouldn't contain too many images. The Somalia article does only present a short and concise overview about Somalia and "surrounding topics". Ogaden and the Ogaden war are therefore mentioned and wikilinked to in the history section, but I don't think that it makes much sense to include a map of Ogaden and administrative regions within Ethiopia in the Somalia country article.

For the war in Somalia, Image:Aerial view of a US helicopter as it flies over a Mogadishu residential area.JPEG depicts only a period of it in the past (UN/US foreign intervention 1992–1995), while Image:Mogadishu technical.jpg is more representative of the whole civil war till today.

Furthermore, I regard it as unlogical and unnecessary to depict Abdiqasim Salat Hassan in the article and, more specifically, in the health section since he was not only concerned with health and he is not even in power anymore. For the picture of President Yusuf, I find its quality so poor that it shoudn't appear in the main article about Somalia. Regards, Amphibium 01:47, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

Dear Utzernameusername

I would agree to replacing the image for Somali people if only the picture of the woman were of better quality... since it unfortunately isn't, I still think the one of the children is better unless some other of good quality is found.

For the war picture: Of course images like the one with the helicopter are most "familiar" to many Westerners, but still they represent only a past period of the war – while there have been no such helicopters in Somalia since the end of UNITAF/UNOSOM, technicals continue to be widely used by warring factions inside Somalia, and this is why I find it more representative of the Somali Civil War. I agree to including it in the article about the war in Somalia, but in the general Somalia article IMHO only one picture for the war should be included, the more representative one. For Abdikassim Salat Hassan and Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed, their articles in which their images can be found are of course wikilinked to, which I find sufficient.

Ogaden is also in this map which is in the article. Regards, Amphibium 02:14, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

I agree for President Yusuf, but for the war image I still argue that the article should include an image showing what is actually going on there rather than something people have in their mind about it.

The distinctions and differences between ethnic Somalis and non-Somali minorities are mentioned in the text, as well as those between different Somali clans. Amphibium 02:39, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

Frauen der Farbe

Dieser Begriff ist im Deutschen nicht geläufig, vermutlich handelt es sich um eine Fehlübersetzung von "coloured women". Anyway, ohne Quellenbeleg geht das nicht. Gruß, Stefan64 07:29, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

I understand you're not a native speaker of German. But please stop making the article worse by your inadaequate translations. Thanks. Stefan64 07:56, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

Sorry, a sentence like "multikulturelle Frauen mit Hauttönen in einer Myriade der Farbtöne" is just plainly ridiculous in German. Don't waste your time and mine. Stefan64 08:09, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

Mogadischu / Somalia / Somali (Volk) / Somali (Sprache)

Dear Utzernameusername, why do you delete images and wiki-links such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Patrilinearität, Geschichte Somalias, Blutgeld, Bürgerkrieg in Somalia and flood the articles with links of racial theories? Read EN:WP:NPOV and EN:WP:EL before your next edit. Greetings, --R.Schuster 11:39, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

Picture from an armed convoy trip in Mogadishu

The 2007 date is probably derived from the uploading date, but totally different from the date when the photo was taken – look here as well, the photographer was clearly in Somalia during UNOSOM, not afterwards.

Umm... in case you hadn't noticed, the gentleman already indicated the exact date on which he took the photo with the phrase: Taken on July 18, 2007. What's more, he has been to Somalia recently, as this photo (among many others in that set) taken on February 3, 2006 can attest. Utzernameusername 14:59, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

Something must be wrong with the camera registering the dates when the pictures were taken. Perhaps he used a different camera then and uploaded them onto a computer or digicam in 2006/2007 which registered the upload date as date of taking the picture? Or how come a UN military vehicle or UNOSOM party early in the mission be in 2007? Amphibium 15:32, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

Gimme a break. The photos you linked to aren't the one in the Mogadishu article, and thus have no bearing on it. They have about as much bearing on it as this set of photos, all of which are said to have been 'taken' in 2006. We're splitting hairs here once again, I'm afraid. Utzernameusername 15:40, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

For the "Somali" Bantu, I admit that in English the "Somali" is somewhat misleading since it refers to both the country of Somalia and the Somali ethnicity and the Bantu are undoubtedly not part of the latter. But in German, "somalisch" clearly denotes the country, while "Somali" refers to ethnic Somalis. Therefore at least in German, the "somalische" should be left before the "Bantu" to distinguish the particular group of Bantus inside Somalia from all the other Bantus in other parts of Africa.

We've been through this before I believe: Bantus are indeed a large and diverse ethnic group that span many countries. However, they are all still the same people. That is, whether their ancestors originated in Tanzania or Mozambique 200 years ago in the slave trade or even further back than that, Bantus are all the descendants of Bantu-speaking migrants from the Bantu expansion that first brought them to East Africa about 3000kya-4000kya. Somalis, on the other hand, are a unique and distinct ethnic group with an entirely different cultural, linguistic, ancestral, physical and ethnic background from Bantus. When we juxtapose the name "Somali" -- which delineates the progeny of Soomaal -- by descendants of West/Central African migrants from the Bantu Expansion, we are incorrectly lumping ethnically, physically, culturally, linguistically and ancestrally different people into one group. In other words, Bantus aren't Somalis, and to label them as such is to suggest otherwise. Utzernameusername 14:59, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

The "Somali Welfare Hunt" article is IMHO not a totally reliable source – first of all, why is it titled Somali Welfare Hunt when you claim it is mostly about Bantus? (It is about Bantus as well as about Somalis, or at least the author mixes these two terms up.) Furthermore the author doesn't even seem to know that the Bantus of Somalia originate not only from Tanzania, but from Mozambique, Malawi and Kenya as well – he mostly gives his POV about US refugee policy, which is a relevant POV, but not really a reliable source.

That's all opinion, and I can't debate opinion. The man who wrote the article was spot on. He nailed it. It is Bantus that are, proportionately speaking, the folks in Lewiston that are really taxing the system. It's not Somalis. This article -- among others -- makes this clear right away in its sub-heading: The Refugee Act of 1980 has turned thousands of Somali Bantu into American dependents. Millions more “refugees” may be eligible for resettlement in your neighborhood. Maybe this pains you, but it's also the truth and a reliable source per Wiki policies. Utzernameusername 14:59, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

I included the article about Somalis and Bantus in Lewiston because it is really in-depth and offers interesting insights about how Somalis in the diaspora live, and about their relationships, attitudes and behaviour towards non-Somali ethnic minorities of Somalia. The article about genetic analyses is already linked as a reference and the list of references in that article is not very long, therefore there is no need to link it once more. For articles about race and "racial truth" in general, I see no need to link to them in an article which is not about race but about one specific ethnic group.

Your article is irrelevant, again, because it talks about a town now defined by folks that have precious little to do with Somalis. There is nothing more relevant to Somalis then themselves. And given the choice between scientific, peer-reviewed genetic studies that let Somalis and others know who Somalis really are versus one article that addresses a migration not defined by Somalis, the many genetic studies win out every time. Utzernameusername 14:59, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

For me wanting to "mislead about the identity of ethnic Somalis": What exactly do you accuse me of? What am I misleading about, and what is "the truth" according to you? Of course I know that Somalis and "Somali" Bantu are different, and I am not trying in any way to disguise this distinction. Amphibium 14:22, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

The truth, as punsters say, is in the pudding. And the pudding is, in this case, the genetic studies. It's not rocket science. Utzernameusername 14:59, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

Also, I don't see why not to include the picture of the Bantu women in the Somalia article's section about minorities – Bantus are part of the country of Somalia (though absolutely not of the Somali ethnicity), they are clearly denoted as such, and exactly the picture of them in comparison to an image of ethnic Somalis above makes the difference between both more clear, doesn't it? Furthermore, the image of the children shows quite well the brighter skin and the softer hair of Somalis.
But since you are probably right not to include too many images of Bantus in the Somalia article, I did not re-insert the image of Bantu farmers in the economy section, but one of a Somali farmer in the ethnically far more homogenous northern part of Somalia (Somaliland) instead. Amphibium 14:33, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

I've already gone through the blurry children image issue with you. How many times must I repeat that they are not representative of what ethnic Somalis look like? The girl is, and no portion of her photo is blurry. As for the Bantu woman, she is part of an ethnic group that represents a vanishingly small part of Somalia. Benadiris, while also being minorities, have left and continue to leave a much more significant stamp on Somali society than Bantus. This is fact. So if a photo is to be included in that section at all, it should be of Benadiri folk. Utzernameusername 14:59, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)

Ayaan Hirsi Ali's birthplace

I have read Ayaan Hirsi Ali's autobiography ("Infidel", or "Mein Leben, meine Freiheit" in German), where AHA describes her early childhood in Mogadishu; she was born there in 1969, the family moved to Saudi Arabia in 1978 and later on to Ethiopia and finally to Nairobi, Kenya. AHA herself returned to Mogadishu once more in 1990 and went back to Kenya when the security situation worsened. Of course I know that AHA is a controversial person, but while some have raised doubt about her having undergone FGC/FGM or having been forcibly married, no one has ever questioned her birthplace being Mogadishu.

What exactly is the point of this post? Did I not re-insert her into the article despite my own doubts given where she was raised? And despite the fact that no source was provided for where she was raised besides her own autobiography (and we all know how honest those can be)? Utzernameusername 15:06, 26. Jul. 2008 (CEST)