Talk:Kwanzaa/Archive 4

message: Under the "Principles of Kwanzaa" heading, the image, Kwanzaastamp.jpg, appears. The copyright tag for this image states that "the use of postage stamps to illustrate the stamp in question (as opposed to the subject of the stamp)... qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law." It appears to me that the stamp is being used to illustrate the subject, rather than the stamp in question. This raises the question: Does the use of the stamp in this context qualify as fiar use? --JEmfinger 00:53, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it doesn't. I've delinked it. CDC (talk) 19:44, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fair Use of Kwanzaa Stamp? 

message: Nandesuka, while none of us "own" any sections, that goes for you as well.  How many Wikipedia editors were pounced on 12 minutes after adding some text tonight?
Your changes to my content, if they added "relevant, verifiable information" could, should, and must be discussed here with at least me, and hopefully the other editors to achieve a consensus on whether the content I added needed your changes.  Otherwise it's a silly race to a 3RR violation.
I am trying to achieve a simple style for readability.
:::* A summary of controversy on Kwanzaa
:::A cited description of the the controversy. {ref}
I avoided the "some claim...", "some are angered..." vagueness that plagues so many Wikipedia articles, and you just edited in it.
Are the other editors keen on having almost every sentence of the controveries section start with the word some? patsw 04:39, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please don't revert relevant, verifiable information. None of us "own" any sections. 

message: ::Rev Peterson is 100% correct.  In his piece he makes no mention of which paper the quote came from. NYT and WaPo have the same quote! (Interestingly, the WaPo reported that the origins of Kwanzaa were intially kept hidden, with Karenga "confessing" that it was a ruse he used to trick people into celbrating  it - so in fact there is substantial reason to be suspicious of the holiday even now as it was founded on lies and Karenga has proven to be not only a violent felon who brutally tortures people, but also a liar when it comes to his own culture and motives).  The quote is not made up - and ought not be erased from the article on grounds that it is not trustworthy, although the word "bloods" should be changed to "people" or "bloods [blacks]" unless there is a credible source that he meant to refer to the gang. 
:::Washinton Post, Dec 31, 1984, Spirit Still Stands:
:::::First presented as an African ritual, Kwanzaa was later revealed to be totally American. As Karenga confessed, "I created Kwanzaa. People think it's African. But it's not. I wanted to give black people a holiday of their own. So I came up with Kwanzaa. I said it was African because you know black people in this country wouldn't celebrate it if they knew it was American. Also, I put it around Christmas because I knew that's when a lot of bloods [blacks] would be partying." 
:::NYT, Dec 26, 1984, BLACKS TO CELEBRATE AFRICAN HERITAGE HOLIDAY:
:::::Mr. Karenga, who is 43 years old, holds a doctorate in political science and is executive director of the Institute of Pan-African Studies in Los Angeles. He also is a visiting professor of black studies at the University of California at Riverside. He acknowledges that the holiday is his own invention. "People think it's African but it's not," he told an audience at Howard University in 1978. "I wanted to give black people a holiday of their own, so I came up with Kwanzaa. I said it was African because you know black people in this country wouldn't celebrate it if they knew it was American. Also, I put it around Christmas because I knew that's when a lot of people would be partying."
::136.215.251.179 13:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rev Peterson's quote is Accurate 

message: The References section has a several entries that are broadcasts on Fox News and NPR, with dates. It seems to me that these are problematic as references (at least as they currently are in the article), in that they're hard to verify. I think a link should be provided to transcripts of these references, or the references should be removed. (Also, where are they being used in the article?) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 19:25, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Here is jpgordon wanting all kind of evidence, but not wanting evidence for the proposition that there are "principles of blackness."  Why the double standard?  Turtle's Dad
Jpgordon - As a general rule, you don't have to have a link to a source -- a citation is standardly acceptable. Something that appears on NPR or Fox if well cited, can easily be looked up. Transcripts are also available via Proquest and other subscription information databases. Here's a link for help in how to cite sources and citing transcripts in particular.
Turtle's Dad - That's an interesting comment - I wonder who wrote that in? In the initial instance, it would actually have been acceptable, as it was in quotes and sourced to a title a website; but later in the article, it is not appropriate to mention it in and of itself as if it were something factual. On the other hand, if you go back and actually look at where it was sourced to in the first instance, there IS no mention of that phrase - it says only "the Seven Principles." So perhaps someone slipped the additional word in at some point and then thought they could use it later to undermine the article and Karenga? Just a theory... However, you are right - it should not be there, and it should not have stayed so long. Also, whoever worked on that section mispelled Karenga as Kerenga -- that should also be changed. - SL --71.250.88.213 10:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I've found an intersting academic article on Kwanzaa published in Western Folklore in 1997.  It includes an interview with Karenga and a small anthropological-type study of feelings about Kwanzaa among African Americans in Los Angeles.  I got this online from a restricted academic database, and so I would gladly e-mail a small PDF of it to anyone interested.  If you are interested, Email this user at my user page or just leave a note here or at my talk page.--Pharos 21:54, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Academic source 

message: I added an HTML comment () after the red link to William Bennetta to, hopefully, stop people from inadvertently changing it in the belief that they are fixing a typo. If the problem persists, or just to clarify who he is, it might be wise to create at least a substub on Bennetta, even if he perhaps would not otherwise be worth an article. I'd never heard of him, but he seems to be associated with , and the  reference in this article, along with a Google search, might be good starting points if anyone wants to do it. --DavidConrad 04:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bennett/Bennetta 

message: *No. This is a content dispute. Content disputes are explicitly not vandalism. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:48, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cyde's popups reversions are vandalism

message: Since you have no regular IP address, I am posting my warning to you here: Please stop vandalising this page with repeated personal attacks and other violations of wikipedia policy.  There is simply no excuse for your latest tirades.  If you wish to critique the POVs or sources  of others, please do so politely.  Your comments have been proven to be factually challenged and your response has been to attempt sarcasm and to unleash personal invective.  You seem to first make an argument, then when your argument is undercut by facts you then try to change the subject and let loose with emotional diatribes.  It does nothing to advance your views.  Its just not what we do here.  I will report this formally if you do not self-correct and edit your various policy violations immediately. If you love Kwanzaa, that is your business. But this article is not supposed to advance the views of Kwanzaa lovers.  136.215.251.179 10:26, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll revert when you make the same demand of these other "people." Fact is, I do not celebrate Kwanzaa, or have a particular desire to - but I will argue to my death its right to exist and to exist with dignity. You misunderstand my arguments, but that's ok. I don't really expect you to get them. I'm sure many others do, though. For them, its a laugh. As for your "analysis" of me, you wish it were true - truth is, YOU are the one who "make an argument, then when your argument is undercut by facts you then try to change the subject and let loose with emotional diatribes. " And, I would add, you attack your foe (me, in this case) and go running to your mommy crying "he's breaking the rules! Make him stop! Wah!' As for emotional diatribes - you need an emotional diatribe. This page needs an emotional diatribe. It is emotionally and intellectually constipated. - SL --68.45.57.193 08:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  SL is violating wikipedia policies 

message: In case anyone missed this documented fact: the NYT and Washington Post have reported his admitted lies about Kwanzaa, and Karenga's own book (The Quotable Karenga) makes it easy to confirm Karenga's anti-Chrisian and anti-European bigotry as well as his divisive and inflammatory rhetoric.  Of course there is no doubt that he and his political associates were also convicted violent criminals, and that he is on record as an admitted Marxist. This is all important information that should not be hidden from those studying the holiday  or thinking about celebrating it. There is ample and well-documented factual evidence to rationally and logically conclude that the holiday has violent and radical separatist and marxist origins, and that its founding was steeped in misinformation and lies.  One does not HAVE to conclude this, but it is a very rational conclusion one can make.  Please stop painting those who highlight these facts as anything less than rational open-minded thinkers.  Many black people reject the ideas of Karenga on the same basis - they consider him to be a conniving dishonest charlatan.  136.215.251.179 10:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bottom Line: Karenga Admits He Purposefully Lied to Black People About Kwanzaa 

message: Wikipedia sums up racism as follows: 
::Racism refers to beliefs, practices, and institutions that discriminate against people based on their perceived or ascribed "race". Primarily, it refers to an assumption that the human species can meaningfully be divided into races, together with hostility to people of certain races or a belief, conscious or unconscious, that people of different races differ in value. Some people whose thinking about others uses racial categories believe that different races can be placed on a ranked, hierarchical scale.
The first 3 definitions for racism in the Wiktionary:
::1. The belief that members of one race are superior to members of other races.
::2. The belief that members of one ethnic group are superior to members of another ethnic group.
::3. The belief that capability or behavior can be racially defined.
After reviewing the facts, a rational person could very justifibly and naturally conclude that Karenga promoted bigotry and racism and lied about Kwanzaa in order to dupe others into adopting his racist and bigoted views.  As such, Karenga's racist writings and acts MUST be mentioned in any fair and balanced discussion of Kwanzaa (which was developed and promoted WHILE he was also promoting racism). 136.215.251.179 11:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Racism defined 

message: How were the recent edits by 84.146.233.95 a violation of NPOV?  I have no opinion on them either way, but they didn't strike me as POV, as they were largely made up of language that was already in the article and what was made up seemed OK with me.  Please explain the reversion.  Thanks.Gator (talk) 21:22, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess he could say "removed" instead of "eliminated" but this isn't some glaring POV addition.  AGF jpgordon.  -Justforasecond 21:52, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What's AGF have to do with anything? The POV language speaks for itself, regardless of the GF (or lack thereof) of the editor. AGF indeed. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:56, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears you may be assuming that the changes were POV-pushing, while they appeared fairly ordinary (certainly not the blatant POV pushing we've seen elsewhere).  AGF says you should assume others are acting in good faith.  Justforasecond 01:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course it does. I made no statements, assumptions, or anything whatsoever regarding the good faith of the editor; I didn't suggest there was any "POV-pushing" (as, indeed, I avoid that phrase as much as possible, since it adds nothing to the conversation). The words themselves exhibit the POV; the intent of the editor is irrelevant. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 01:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV? 

message: Book-keeping schemes and name-use schemes abound in United States culture.  Kwanzaa was indeed an African holiday, and a post-volcano one.  Karenga did the best he could to remain academic after the Patricia Hearst kidnapping, as the result of an influence network which elicits 'votes' about other people through the telephone using a call-demand strategy. 
Many hoped to collaborate on a critical history of hydroelectric dams in the United States; the Aswan Dam in Egypt may be one that is/was genuinely appropriate and maybe holiday-worthy  --  but that holiday wouldn't be 'Kwanzaa'.  People are/were being kidnapped to provide no-cost encyclopedia information; and as business-scheme 'recruits'.  20:26, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: are you saying we should include info about the SLA-kwanzaa connection in this article?  Justforasecond 20:53, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  schemes and readable copy 

message: The FrontPageMag.com article  is a legitimate source overseen a notable author David Horowitz. Those who keep deleting this link have not justified their actions. Please explain your views here. thank you. 66.98.131.13 04:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, they have; there's a discussion further up the talk page. --Allen 04:25, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Wrong. If 10 million people think something is true which is actually false, we should not add it as though it were true - although we can cover what people think. We have already covered the concerns that people have about possible racism related to Kwanzaa in the article, under Kwanzaa#Controversy. KillerChihuahua?!? 04:37, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Racist Holiday from Hell 

message: Could someone please explain in what way this "William J Bennetta" is sufficiently notable that his opinion about Kwanzaa's use of Swahili is at all relevant? The opinion in itself is pretty worthless, since it's been explained in the "History and Etymology" section that Swahili was used as a symbol of Pan-Africanism. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 06:52, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bennetta