Talk:Mami Wata/Archive 1

message: "Her superlative nature extends to her clothing, which is more fashionable than anything created by a human fashion designer"
I know it's hard to word some things, but this is a little ridiculous. lol
Blueaster 00:33, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, propose something different then. How do you describe someone who is supposed to be more in-fasion than a runway model? BrianSmithson 11:39, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

message: Hello Brain:
We have made some editing changes to the Mami Wata article. However, it is being deleted and reverted 
without explanation and cause. There are no messages in our mailbox.  These changes are important
and necessary, especially from those who know the tradition as oppose to quoting secondary anthropological
sources who have no direct experience with this ancient religion.
Looking forward to hearing from you.
Anagossii--MWHS 23:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mami Wata Edits

message: I removed:
Today, after centuries of supression, the Mami Wata Vodoun tradition is making 
a phenomenal comeback in the Diaspora]]
NOTE TO READERS
Since the subject of this category is "AFRICAN-AMERICAN RELIGIONS,"  in the works is an essay on Mami Wata as it is known and lived by those in the Diaspora and in West Africa. For the moment, it is important to note that Mami Wata is not a recent phenomena. The Mami Wata priestess-hood is as old as Africa herself.  Its priestess-hood is born and inherited by those who are still cosmogentically linked with some of the most ancient deities in Africa.  Additionally, the Mami Wata tradition is experiencing a phenomenal come-back in the United States, after centuries of its suppression during Slavery and Reconstruction.  It is also important to note that anthropological and western feminists terms such as "cult," "god/dess" and "animistic,"  etc.,  are categorically rejected by the African-American Diaspora.  Those who are initiated, trained and know Mami Wata's mysteries find these categorizations misleading and offensive.  Lastly, as it stands, the first essay below is the western "academic" analysis of Mami Wata, which is not supported by the Mami Wata priestess-hood in the African-American Diaspora.  What will soon follow is another essay which we hope will shed new light on these ancient, African ancestral traditions. 
. . . As unsourced and a violation of the neutral point of view policy. — BrianSmithson 12:58, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed

message: ----
*Brain, we have added your original post to the thread below since it was somehow omitted, and yet is the posting that originally opened the dialogue with the MWHS. Additionally, though you have re-posted the original synopsis that was deleted from the Mami Wata page, our main grievance is your deletion and censured of the actual article that was written by Mama Zogbé on both Voodoo and Vodun respectively. No actual article has yet been written on Mami Wata by Mama Zogbé.  Anagossi, Anagossii, Mamisii-Hounon
:My original post on this matter was made a notice board, namely the Africa-related regional notice board. These are normally not places for discussion but rather places to point to talk pages where discussions are normally held (like this one). I was not trying to divorce my comments from the discussion at hand, and if that's the impression I gave, I apologize.
:As for your main concern stated above, I have not deleted anything from Voodoo. I removed some material from Vodun because someone (presumably you) tried to change it from a redirect page to a new article. If you visit the article Voodoo, you will see in the introduction that the article covers Vodun as well as other traditions that are sometimes referred to as Voodoo. Until consensus is reached to do so, no one should unilaterally split Vodun off into a separate article.
:If you wish to discuss the creation of a separate article for Vodun (that is, separate from Voodoo), I urge you to discuss the matter at Talk:Voodoo. I have no personal involvement in the Voodoo article, so I will not discuss that article any further. — BrianSmithson 17:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (Seems discussion has opened here - we will move it later to Talk:Mami Wata) Anagossi, thank you for your references above, something Brian was asking for. You cannot 'claim' articles as your own, and the point of view should not be swung one-sidedly towards Mama Zogbé. However, Africa has a dearth of verifiable references, and it may be that Mama Zogbé is a good authority. Wikipedia is a collaborative work, and thank you for opening dicussion. I think you should add your references to the article first, and then use Talk:Mami Wata page. Wizzy…☎ 07:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Brian asked some questions - valid ones, I think. The only way to get an answer was to block you. Why did you not engage in dialog when he asked ? I will shortly be moving all this discussion to the Talk page. I have checked your references - they have little readable information and are too flash-heavy for inclusion in external references. Your addition to the article did not improve it, and added little new information. You say: Mami Wata is neither a recent growing phenomena, a cult, nor a goddess worshiping tradition, and yet the picture citation you added says :- Mami Wata Vodoun tradition is making a phenomenal comeback in the Diaspora. I think the article as it stands is not derogatory. Do you have any useful information to add ? Wizzy…☎ 14:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Mamissi Hounon, I just wanted to let you know that I will respond to your concerns. Unfortunately, I am at work at the moment, and the websites to which you have linked are blocked (all religious sites are). I am in a wedding this weekend, so do not think that I am ignoring you. I want to discuss this issue. — BrianSmithson 14:42, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Erm, "Lastly, we are a busy Society and do not have the time to debate in an open forum."?? The essense of Wikipedia is collaboration, and the way this takes place is by communication, primarily via the Talk pages of articles. I think the first barrier to be overcome here is the notion that one can be too busy to talk about one's edits, but not too busy to actually make those edits in the first place. - Merzbow 05:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh, and if you have problems with the article as it stands now, please let me know. I have already addressed some of your concerns, such as replacing the terms god and goddess with spirit where appopriate. The article still refers to Mami Wata as she, but this is in keeping with the sources used. — BrianSmithson 02:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I have asked the editor who protected those pages to unprotect them. But just a minor note: Something can be very old but still be growing. Even if you accept that Mami Wata worship is old, you can still accept that it is gaining in popularity. — BrianSmithson 13:42, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved conversation from the [[Wikipedia:Africa-related regional notice board|Africa-related regional notice board]]

message: I find the sources cited for the recent changes quite questionable. The version I have reverted to uses scholarly, peer-reviewed sources. The one that Mwhs is trying to add here uses websites that are not peer reviewed and fail Wikipedia:Reliable sources. No source I consulted suggests that Mami Wata originated in ancient Egypt, for example, and claims of such ancient origins are often a sign of a crackpot theory. -- BrianSmithson 22:31, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was not my intention to insult, so I apologize for any language that may have implied such. If you want your edits to be considered, you need to add a reference citation after every change you make. You can do this very easily; just type (Author page#) (replacing "author" with the name of the author and "page#" with the page number from the source) after each change you make. That will allow us to determine which edits come from a reliable source and which do not. As I said, your organization's website is not a reliable source for anything except what your organization believes. However, your other sources can be evaluated on a case-by-case basis if you let us know what change comes from what source. — BrianSmithson 02:40, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Round 2 

message: Hello!
I notice the Democratic Republic of Congo and Zaire both in the same table. Zaire's the former name of the DRC, did the names used differ from the time the country was called Zaire to its present name, DRC?
Might there be any connection with Nyaminyami: Legend of the River God? When I lived in Harare I remember seeing small coiled serpent medallions carved out of stone and being told they represented Nyaminyami. They were quite popular, but I think most people wore them as fashion statements rather than for any religious symbolism. Please would you check to see if there is any relevance, I am no expert and wouldn't know but would like to know.
Thanks
:I don't have any reference to Nyaminyami in my notes (I'm still working on a rewrite of this article), but that doesn't mean the two spirits/deities aren't related. This article mentions both Mami Wata and Nyaminyami but doesn't otherwise link them. — BrianSmithson 09:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two comments/questions

message: :Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~
After personally  taking the time to carefully review both the Mami Wata article, its corresponding references  and the accompanying discussions posted here, it is clear that the numerous claims lodged against its author are erroneous, and has not been proved  to be in violation of Wikipedias’s publishing guidelines.  
It is also my opinion that Wikipedia editor, Brain Smithson:
* has acted not to aid or to assist the authors in their honest attempt to add to the enormous knowledge base at  Wikipedia, but to discourage and block their attempts to contribute their scholarship.
* has acted irresponsibly, unprofessionally and with personal bias  with the sole intent to discredit, malign and slander the authors and their religious organization. 
* has deliberately red-flagged the  Mami Wata article, with the deliberate intent to aggressively condemn and discredit its scholarly content in the strongest possible terms.  
*has repeatedly failed to state his personal and professional experience in this particular African spiritual tradition which would justify his actions.
Based on the evidence, one can only conclude that  Brain is  lacking both personal and professional experience in the Mami Wata tradition, and is therefore  not qualified to red-flag the Mami Wata article, or  to pass professional or experiential judgement against a religious organization who has clearly  proven their academic and personal experience in this particular spiritual system.
Therefore I am requesting that readers offer either their "support" or "opposition" in demanding  that Brain answer the question pertaining to his personal and professional (i.e., academic, scholarly etc.,) experience in the Mami Wata tradition. If he cannot, then he must respectfully concede that he is not qualified to red-flag the Mami Wata article and must remove them. — Stacey Peterson --74.229.102.208 14:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Occam's Razor.
That is all.
- ∅ (∅), 03:25, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Would you care to expand on that point? -GTBacchus(talk) 04:20, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To quote myself: "Look, even if according to these books wata did mean "Hokey Pokey" in Ancient Wallawalladingdang, it's OR to claim that it does so in the name of Mami Wata when you can't source that claim in the books." We have corresponding pairs like Mami Wata ~ Maman Dlo, so obviously the first part means mother and the second part means water. It goes straight against Occam's Razor to claim that Wata comes from Uati or any of several different and conflicting ancient deities. - ∅ (∅), 22:56, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Religious beliefs do not always follow paths that outsiders perceive as logical. Deities tend to work in mysterious ways. Best, --Shirahadasha 00:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's not the point. This article claims for a fact that the name stems from one or several words in one or several ancient languages. That's etymology, not religion. If it's their religious belief that the name comes from Ancient Ohdedoodahday, then the article should say so, and not posit it as a fact. - ∅ (∅), 06:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

text: My view is that the MWHS, if it is established they are what they claim to be, is entitled to say essentially anything they want about the religious beliefs and cultural traditions of the Mami Wata faith and culture as practiced by the MWHS, as long as their views are presented as such. They are authorities and experts on this subject. But they are not necessarily authorities and experts on other subjects. On the other hand, what anthropologists and linguists say is not necessarily "fact" either. It is simply what anthropologists and linguists say, and their views should also be presented as such. Their authority and expertise also has its limits. Wikipedia takes a Neutral Point of View between the two. Best, --Shirahadasha 07:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, we should also make it obvious what the majority of experts thinks. Cf. Flat Earth, Time Cube. - ∅ (∅), 08:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, but I also agree with MWHS on a key element of this dispute, which is that the recognized religious leaders of a religion are the experts on matters of what constitutes the religion's faith, and are empowered to decide and explain religious law and tradition in the something like the same way that judges, not academics, have primary power to decide and explain secular law. As long as anything they say about religious beliefs and cultural traditions is clearly identified as their view, WP:RS is complied with. In the event of a conflict between their views on these matters and the views of western academics, both opinions should be identified and attributed. This is done in articles on major religions all the time. See e.g. Resurrection of Jesus where both religious and academic views are provided about the historicity of the event. In that article the religious view is given first, followed by a "critical analysis" section with academic/critical  views. Best, --Shirahadasha 23:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree wholeheartedly with the statement that "the MWHS... is entitled to say essentially anything they want about the religious beliefs and cultural traditions of the Mami Wata faith and culture as practiced by the MWHS." The major issue I have with this is that the article under dispute appears to be describing the Mami Wata faith in general, not the Mami Wata faith as practiced by MWHS. As an example (and I hate using it here), consider the difference between Scientology and the Church_of_Scientology. While the Church of Scientology constitute the religious leaders of the Church of Scientology, and thus are entitled to say whatever they want about that, that does not entitle them to make statements about Scientology in general. Similarly, MWHS is justified in saying anything that they like about "Mami Wata as practiced by the MWHS," they are not justified in making statements about Mami Wata in general. As a result, any beliefs that they have should be placed either on their own website, or on a separate MWHS Wikipedia page. Forsakendaemon 10:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ancient origins of name "Mami Wata" 

message: We are posting here for the record the bio of Mami Wata Vodoun Chief Priestess, Mama Zogbe whom we have quoted extensively througout the Mami Wata article. We have attempted twice to publish her bio on Wiki as a legitmate religious clergy in the African Ancestral Religions in the US.  Yet this "offending" bio was immediately deleted without discussion or even an opportunity to correct any editing problems.  We follow this with a wikilink to fallen evangelical preacher, Ted_Haggard's site,  where even Mike_Jones_%28personal_trainer%29 (Haggard's male prostitute) is given full Wiki honors of an extensive bio, and even external links to his personal website which displays  XXXfrontal nudity. We will let you decide the real impetus behind this move on the part of some Wiki-editors. 
The "offending" bio in question can be viewed here. We will allow other editors to decide the real impetus behind this move. --MWHS 19:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You realize, I hope, that decisions about what to include in Wikipedia have nothing to do with "worthiness" in any moral sense.  A biography here isn't an "honor", nor is not having a bio here any kind of dishonor.  We're just trying to stick to our policy that we only summarize what has been previously published elsewhere.  If a male prostitute has been written about in reputable publications, then we may summarize what's been said.  If a Vodoun Chief Priestess hasn't been documented by independent sources, then we have nothing on which to base a biography, so how can we guarantee its accuracy?  It's pretty easy for me to "decide the real impetus".  It's called Wikipedia:Verifiability. -GTBacchus(talk) 18:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bio deleted

message: Since some IP number out there has repeatedly removed, without comment, the well referenced section on the origin of the widely discussed snake charmer image of Mami Wata, I'm thinking it might be best to create a separate article for Maladamajaute under one of her various aliases. She headlined at the Folies Bergere, toured the world as a circus act for 20 odd years, and inspired a popular image of a goddess. I think that's notable enough, ain't it? There's ample information about her life in secondary sources. I could probably drop 10 references on it right now. Any objections? Tarchon (talk) 02:58, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maladamajaute a.k.a. Nala Damajanti a.k.a. Emilé (Poupon) Breitweiser 

message: ::Where is the socalled rewrite on this article Brain? It's been TWO YEARS. Ever since this Brain and his cronies started disrespecting and fighting with the Mami Wata initiates things have not been going well in his life. When will you and others learn that you cannot insult Mami Wata's children and expect things to go well for you. This is not your tradition and the notion that you can impose your arrogrant euro supremancy against native people by writing their history from your [scholars] point of view in their faces and demand that they settle for it, will not work anymore. Your behavior was dispicable and has turned off many from taking Wikipedia seriously.--99.62.96.181 (talk) 13:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, sorry. I've gotten severely sidetracked, though I still have all of my notes organized into what I think would be a sensible article structure. It'll come eventually. . . . — Brian (talk) 22:32, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've trimmed it somewhat... unfortunately it's not really possible for me to check through the rather impressive list of "references" and see which ones are actually relevant to the article. I'm sure most of them were only there for show to begin with. The article is still a horrendous mess but I think the worst rubbish is gone now. - ∅ (∅), 19:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite? 

message: Can some of the sources listed in the reference section be moved to a "Further reading" section? Just wondering, because it seems odd to me that with all the scholarly books listed in the "References" section, it is the rather ad-rich, non-referenced web site ArcyArt (which in addition sports text that is not attributed to a particular author) that is singled out as the major source in the ref tags of the "Footnotes" section. Pia 01:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No clue what sources were actually used (and which sources actually say what the article claims they do). The Mami Wata Healers' Society of North America rewrote most of the article and left what you see today. — Brian (talk) 02:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Brian, I haven't looked at the history of the article. I'll do that asap then. The "References" section has some eclectic choices but it appears, at a first glance, to be a pretty solid (and wide) base to build an article on, with a variety of scholarly texts by well-known authors from around the world. With a lit. list like that, ref tags linking to manifests produced by religious societies in the US, or to non-attributed text from commercial art sites, would not seem necessary in the end. But sourcing pre-existing text can take a lot of time and effort, of course. Best, Pia 05:41, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I'm probably guilty for the reference to the commercial website, by the way. I wrote the original version of the article a couple of years ago, before I fully understood the importance of using and citing reliable sources. I've got a huge text file of notes from many of those scholarly sources listed as references, so please let me know if there's a specific fact for which you cannot find an acceptable reference. — Brian (talk) 05:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: Hey, guys, look at the two small pictures 
to the left under to subtitle: PRIESTHOOD AND WORSHIP, 
the article claims that those two pictures are 
pictures of shrines to Mami Wata. This is not true. 
Instead the two pictures presented are either shrines 
honoring the Indian Hindu gods, none of whom have 
anything to do with the west african goddess, Mami 
Wata and what appears to be a shrine honoring some 
east asian deities, again none of whom have 
anything to do with Mami Wata. Can you 
please find some pictures on 
REAL shrines dedicated to the 
goddess. please and thank you.-----Kim  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.136.47.28 (talk) 05:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, there's no problem. Mami Wata shrines often incorporate iconography from other religions and adapt it to the worship of Mami Wata. — Amcaja (talk) 06:33, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Images

message: I have just purchased the Fowler Museum of UCLA's new book 'Mami Wata, Arts for Water Spirits in Africa and Its Diasporas' () and would like you to know that the MWHS and Mama Zogbe, her website and story are featured on pages 134 to 136. Please also note that the esteemed authors of this book write that the MWHS website "provides the Internet's most thorough information on Mami Wata". So, why was the MWHS submission and their re-working of this Brian's article erased? And why were these MWHS members vilified here? - N. Kimoko  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.249.225.22 (talk) 14:23, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, the book is new, so it wasn't around for the original editors. They couldn't use it when the article was being written and debated. 210.161.167.199 (talk) 00:15, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: New book

message: We have removed all of our bibliographic resources from this article, since the original article of which we contributed has been seriously altered or reverted.  It is deceptive and improper to continue to utilize our resources to support a point of view which does not reflect the reality of Mami Wata, nor our experiences, academically and professionally. Further, the photos that we have contributed can remain, and some of the names of Mami Wata that you have listed in your “chart”, although they been removed from their original location to reflect the Mami Wata tradition in the US, they may remain also.  Finally, you may continue to revise this article to reflect whatever perception you feel suitable to the western palate of this ancient African/Diaspora ancestral religion. We will not interfere. --MWHS (talk) 21:03, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  MWHS Removal of Bibliographical Resources 

message: This new book should prove to be a useful source for new information: 
Maybe I'll get around to reading the book and plundering it for good content, but if I don't I hope someone else will. -Kenirwin/(talk)  20:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Book: Sacred Waters 

message: We would like to know why the mamiwata.com and Dr. Drewal links are being removed from this article’s “external links”?  We are the major contributor to this article including its photos.  Our links have been cited in Dr. Drewal’s work as the definitive website for both academic and cultural information on Mami Wata; as well as a comprehensive resource. We welcome and encourage all relevant links on the subject of Mami Wata, but not at the exclusion of our contributions. Please tell us why they are being removed. If this continues, we will request arbitration to decide if our complaint is warranted. We look forward to hearing from you on this matter.
Pease note that we will continue intensive monitoring of this article, and if our links are removed we will replace them until it is determined through arbitration that they are of no relevant value to the subject or to this article that we have contributed.
--MWHS (talk) 02:43, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The YouTube video from a newscast is copyrighted and not likely posted with the broadcaster's permission.  Our policy specifically forbids posting links to material posted in violation of its copyright. The other two links - to a website and to a video posted by the creators of that website constitute "self published" information.  The website's source is a single "shrine" and is no more appropriate than a Christian church posting links to its own website within the external links section of an article about Christianity.  Please take a moment to review our policy on external links, and you will better understand.  Please also note that your editing of this article constitutes a conflict of interest and you should refrain from promoting your own organization within our articles.  If you persist in self-promotion, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.  Rklawton (talk) 12:18, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

text: It appears you have no objection to the link removal, so I'll take them down. They were added to several articles in link-spam fashion. If you wish to add external links, please consider linking to some of Dr. Drewal’s peer-reviewed publications. This approach to external links helps ensure our readers have access to detailed, reliable information on the subject, and aren't mislead by well-meaning (or otherwise) people.  Rklawton (talk) 18:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of Relevant Mami Wata External Links

message: I've removed this book from the references section.  It's self-published and self-promotional.  We have no means to determine its reliability or usefulness.  Basically, it's more spam from Mama Zogbé (who claims a Masters in Education).  Rklawton (talk) 18:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Mami Wata: Africa’s Ancient God/dess Unveiled

message: We have removed all MWHS SPAM (our contribution) to this article. As long as it is not reverted where our contribtion is included, we will not interfere.--MWHS (talk) 16:04, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, you irrevocably agreed to release your contributions under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. This means that Wikipedia can use your contributions as it sees fit and without regard for your desire to remove it. Removing any useful parts of your donated work constitutes vandalism, and you will be blocked from editing if you continue.  Rklawton (talk) 18:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of All MWHS Contribution to Article 

message: What is the etymology of the name?  Usually, on pages such as this, this is one of the first paragraphs. --Criticalthinker (talk) 08:32, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Etymology 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Mami Wata. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050417071004/http://server1.fandm.edu:80/departments/Anthropology/mami.html to http://server1.fandm.edu/departments/Anthropology/mami.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:03, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mami Wata. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141229021958/http://www.freunde-afrikanischer-kultur.de/vortraege-und-artikel-bei-vdfak/61-trajektorien-einer-ikone-hans-himmelheber-und-die-erforschung-des-mami-wata-kults.html to http://www.freunde-afrikanischer-kultur.de/vortraege-und-artikel-bei-vdfak/61-trajektorien-einer-ikone-hans-himmelheber-und-die-erforschung-des-mami-wata-kults.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:50, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: What about in Togo?  What are they called? Stjohn1970 (talk) 12:48, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Togo