Talk:Mansa Musa/Archive 1

message: could someone make a window for that image of him?
:Which image do you mean?  --Dvyost 05:11, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Image request?

message: Just removed this sentence pending citation:  "He went on hajj because he accidentally killed his mother by dropping a knife on her leg."
This seems possible but could easily be a legend; I think we need a little more citation (see WP:CITE) about whether historians believe this story, and where it comes from.  Sound ok?  --Dvyost 16:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: At this point, you're wikipedia's foremost expert on Mansa Musa, so, OK :P Siyavash 19:56, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If I'm Wikipedia's foremost expert on Musa, then he's in quite a lot of trouble.  =)  Nah, I'm just falling back on good ol' WP:CITE--my code for "I don't know if this is correct or not and don't really have time to look it up myself."  --Dvyost 06:16, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mother claim 

message: Every Famous leader in various ages of civilization have a "Fictional references" section, or something to that effect. I would have to completely disagree with the editor who chose to do away with that. Clearly, they haven't been using wikipedia all that much, or they're on some sanctimonious crusade to do away with the fictional references section of every famous world figure in history. Siyavash 22:22, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: While I originally had similar concerns, I must respectfully disagree with you statement. I inquired of the user who made those edits and his response here was well reasoned and allivated my concerns about his actions, which were in progress at that time. -JCarriker 22:49, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I'm going to have to in turn respectfully disagree with your change of heart. It's not even all that well reasoned, and all that it contains are a few buzzwords. The following articles contain text pertaining to fictional references of a historical figure. Some may or may not have anything to do with aforementioned game:
* Genghis Khan (see Outside Mongolia)
* Kublai Khan (see Kublai Khan in fiction)
* Tokugawa Ieyasu (see Tokuhawa Ieyasu in popular culture)
* Ashoka (see Ashoka in popular culture)
* Saladin (see Saladin in Media)
* Qin Shi Huang (see Qin Shi Huang in fiction)
* Hatshepsut (see In popular culture)
I think it's even more silly to be so hung up on a passing computer game reference to go on deleting crusade. Does this mean we're going to get rid of all "... in Popular Culture", " ... in media" and "... in fiction" sections for all the world leaders? Or are we merely getting rid of anything having to do with a computer game? I really don't buy that they're solely being removed because they are the only fictional reference on the list. We have to start somewhere. 
How would such a list of fictional references for historical figures even take off if someone comes along and deletes everything? Anyway, I'm not going to edit anything more on these matters. I don't even play Civilization IV anymore, so calling me in particular a "fanboy" is sort of oddm so if everyone concurs that they no longer want these references in multiple historical figure articles and do not want any information about their fictional portrayals, I wont get involved.
Siyavash 01:08, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

text: First off, I had no change of heart, Sandstein's response simply verified that he was not going to stumble across, Hatshepsut (largely my work) and find that there was not only a reference to Civ IV, but also a pic, and an entire section and begin hacking away at it. In his response he made it clear that he was not going to damage the In popular culture section at Hatshepsut, which was my primary concern. I believe that similar sections are valuable in any article that seeks to pursue holistic coverage. As such I found him well reasoned as in his posyion was reasonable because he wasn't out to anhialate every reference to Civ IV outside of computer articles. If you disagree with his actions or are offended by something he said then you should take it to his talk page, it's not likely he'll see it here. -JCarriker 05:20, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: Fictional references 

message: Some (I think?) believe Mansa Musa traveled to the Americas...is this just a modern Afrocentric myth or does it have any basis in reality?
:There's very sparse evidence that his predecessor Abubakari II may have tried (see article), but nothing conclusive; never heard that Musa himself did, though.  --Dvyost 07:06, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: His predecessor tried abdicated the throne of Mali to explore the "Green Sea of Darkness" (Atlantic Ocean) in hopes of opening up new trade areas. The mansa (Abubakari II) sent one expedition in around 1310 and left with another in 1311. He never returned. No one knows if he made it or not. But he (Abubakari II) did attempt it. Musa on the other hand never did. His biggest venture was the hajj.Scott Free (talk) 23:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visited New World? 

message: I've removed the exacting figures on how many slaves he had, how much gold he had and how long it took the economy to recover, and rounded it off to generic terms. If someone wants to quote an authoritative primary source for the figures that would be OK, although I think it's better for an encyclopedia not to get into a debate on numbers since probably no one really knows, and it's really a bit of trivia that's not that significant. The important thing is, he had a lot of gold which caught peoples attention. -- Stbalbach 11:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but I think the exact amount of gold would be great if this was known. I think people would find it very interesting to see just how rich this man was. However, I do see your point on why it shouldn't be there.
Fredtastic 01:01, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Visit to Cairo

message: The first paragraph says he was born in 1300-1315, but also says he became king in 1312.
How could that be possible?
72.152.10.70 (talk) 00:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know where those birth years are coming from. Mandinka culture doesn't consider someone to be in the majority to get married (let alone become emperor of the wealthiest nation in the world) until about 20. Musa was regent of the Mali Empire in 1311 and became emperor in 1312. Logic dictates he could not have been born any later than 1292 (1295 at the latest!). Sundjata Keita is reputed to have been only 18 when he became Mali's first emperor, but that was an extraordinary circumstance. His son siezed the throne at about the same age (the records say Mansa Wali wasn't old enough to become emperor either).Scott Free (talk) 04:41, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  King before birth? 

message: That isn't in the article, but I take a homeschool course called "Education 2020", and when Mansa Musa made a Mecca privelage, he gave out gold so much that it was temprorarily devalued.
Is this worth a mention?
--TurtleShroom! :) †Jesus Loves You and Died for you!† 16:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Devaluing Gold 

message: I'd made a recent edit to the page concerning the actual pronunciation of Mansa Musa's name which is usually recognized as "Kankan Musa".. However, reading Hunwick and the Tarikh al-Sudan has brought to my attention that this is likely not the proper pronunciation. From his notes on chap 3 of the Tarikh, in his book "Timbuktu and the Songhay empire[]...", he cites Cissoko, writing:
"According to Cissoko (1969), this should be read "Kankou", which is a common Manding female name. Thus Kankou Musa would mean Musa whose mother was Kankou". TF.32-3 reads Kunku and confirms it is a woman's name".
Let me know or supersede me if you find anything to the contrary....Taharqa (talk) 15:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kankou Musa 

message: This article is oddly named.  I would suggest either moving it back to Mansa Musa or Musa I of Mali.  Was there a reason that his title was lower cased and put in parenthesis?  [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 23:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the present name is odd and strongly support renaming the article to "Mansa Musa" – short and without diacritics. This is the usual name in English and satisfies the requirements of the MOS.  Note that mansa means king. The Encyclopaedia of Islam also has "Mansa Mūsā" (Vol. 6 p.421).  Levtzion in his "Ancient Ghana and Mali" used "Mansā Mūsā". I think the longer "Mansa Musa of Mali" is unnecessary and even slightly confusing as people may confuse the ancient Mali Empire with the present country. Aa77zz (talk) 12:59, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I am unfamiliar with procedures, should this be listed somewhere for more comments to get a larger consensus?  [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 10:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd be cool with renaming the article if the person or persons desiring such action promise to do the same for the other mansa of the Mali Empire. that's at least like 15 pages. I'm really only concerned with consistency.Scott Free (talk) 10:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I would have no problem attempting that feat, once there is a bit of consensus on the title.  I would myself prefer all to fall in line with Mansa I of Mali simply because that is the preferred way to name all other royals.  [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 17:37, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename 

message: User Jiopoop changed the date that Musa started his reign fron 1307 to 1312. I reverted this as Bell 1972 gives 1307 and cites Nehemia Levtzion, "The Thirteenth and Fourteenth-Century Kings of Mali," Journal of African History, IV (1963), 349 which indeed gives 1307. Levtzion cites Ibn-Khaldun. However, I'm now less sure as confusingly Levtzion in his Ancient Ghana and Mali (1973) page 66 gives 1312 and cites Pageard (J.S.A., 1961), 79. I'll try to check Ibn-Khaldun and Pageard. Aa77zz (talk) 23:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of reign 

message: A section in the article should discuss how this is left out of world history classes in grade school and high school. I find it very odd that this subject was not covered at all considering how powerful this Black King was.  This should be added to the article.--ProofMaster (talk) 20:11, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not taught in standard world history classes 

message: Re the recent anon edit changing it to 1332, I gather no-one really knows, but the print sources used to construct the page presumably went for 1337. Our old friend the 1911 Britannica certainly seems to have no idea. Pinkbeast (talk) 02:11, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death date 

message: I'm up against 3RR, since this does appear to be a good-faith but confused edit. I've posted to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:79.176.206.180 asking what on earth they're thinking of, but no reply, of course. Can someone else look into it? Pinkbeast (talk) 17:45, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  This "a.c." stuff 

message: I had added the following under the Legacy section:
"According to a 2012 study by the site Celebrity Net Worth Mansa Musa was the wealthiest person in history adjusted for inflation. His net worth was valued at $400 billion." 
However, after a bit of logic set in I removed it because the "study" uses an annual inflation rate of over 2,000%, which is nonsense. Their numbers simply don't stack up. So I've removed it until the issue gets resolved.
Here is some further discussion on another talk page 
Coinmanj (talk) 06:07, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed it again, although I suspect it will be a hardy perennial. Musa was clearly not strapped for cash, but that Celebrity Net Worth article is pure nonsense. Pinkbeast (talk) 17:07, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

text: " There was no form of written language in Sub Saharan Africa at that time (Arabic in a few cases was used only for religious purposes). There were no physical structures other than huts made of sticks and twiggs." And Great Zimbabwe. And Timbuktu was as a major center of Islamic learning. And we'd have to accept the artifice of 'Sub-Saharan Africa', to divide it from the Sahara and the Nile Valley, which is the origin of most civilization. It is the Hollywood/Tarzan version of Africa, which basically mindmelds steel age and medieval West Africa/Sub-Saharan Africa empires with Papua New Guinea and it's stone age cultures. 2001:1C00:1E20:D900:C1C8:11FD:11F3:B6AB (talk) 03:19, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wealthiest person in history? 

message: Why is this article not called Mansa Musa per Wikipedia Naming policy? WP:TITLE. Names are confusing enough stick to the Popular name. --Inayity (talk) 22:01, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I can see per Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_%28royalty_and_nobility%29#Sovereigns "Musa I of Mali" is correct. I don't believe the article title has changed. Mansa Musa redirects here; while it's how he is often known hem-hem thanks partly to the Civilization videogames, it does tend to give the impression that his forename was "Mansa". Up to you, but I'd leave it be. Pinkbeast (talk) 00:32, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The title seems ridiculously contrived to me. If Victoria of the United Kingdom can be Queen Victoria, so can "Musa I of Mali" be Mansa Musa. I have never seen him referred to with an ordinal outside this article. —Sesel (talk) 00:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did someone change the name of this article? 

message: Mansa Musa's legacy in the Wikipedia page comes off as revisionist history by an editor and false.
It says Mali as a global power but in the same paragraph it states Mali wasn't even the most powerful country in Africa.
'Rivaled by Egypt and Morocco'
Exactly, and then you have to take the Middle East into consideration, certain European countries, East Asia, and possibly even a few more civilizations.
It wasn't even close to being a global power and it talks about Europeans going there for education (Europeans didn't even visit Timbuktu documented until the 19th century) and never any documentation of Asians going there during Mali Empire too.
It's false, the source doesn't even have verification, and the only thing accurate is about the architecture part.
- Cau7ion (talk)
:thanks your opinion, can you now wait for the talk page to decide if your suggestions are worthy of inclusion? this is the procedure.--Inayity (talk) 05:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait for WP:NORUSH now Please stop changing the article to your version while a talk page discussion is in progress. If you are unable to do this then Wikipedia is the wrong place as we have rules which goven contributions. The minute you stop edit warring you will find people listen to your objects and give them space.--Inayity (talk) 07:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The edit history of the article shows You have been reverted not only by me, I came late to this scrap. I was the one that said the source is not R>S. Only because of the website it is on, we are trying to find the source of the PDF on that page. But the article it properly written. If you want you can make a request for comments. WP:RFC--Inayity (talk) 09:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

text: Some indication you've read any of the sources for the article not available on the Web would be nice. Pinkbeast (talk) 13:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

text: What I'm saying is that you quite obviously have not read any of the print sources for the article. I have. Please do not make edits without proper knowledge of the sources. Pinkbeast (talk) 18:04, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I would be happy if he could use the indent on the talk page, but that might be too much. What Pinkbeast is saying if you did not get it the first time is try and get a grasp of the sources on Mansa Musa. If you see mistakes which are technical, that is different from "Well written". And this edit warring is not going to work. As i said when you do it, it does not make people listen better to your points (where they exist). --Inayity (talk) 19:07, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: what I'm saying is that you quite obviously have not ready any of the prince sources for the article
I would appreciate it if you could form a statement with semi-coherence next time so I could fully comprehend your post.
I have read the sources and the sources consist of one in the legacy that is the epitome of various things wrong with editing (view my preceded post) and it doesn't even mention global power (direct quotation from legacy) or students in that source.
Once again, the first sentence is anachronistic like I mentioned as the Mali Empire was in the Middle Ages -- not the 2nd Century and going into the Middle Ages, it was literally in the later Middle Ages, so that makes no sense.
The whole legacy is poorly written in its entirety (source wise, grammar, history, etc) it's all trash.
I'm not resulting to edit warring either @Inayity but simply pointing out things wrong with the legacy that are evident.
I am simply asking for an elaboration on how the legacy is currently correct but all you keep saying is basically is 'read the source' and I have, the legacy is false and I've already elaborated why.
-  Cau7ion (talk) 06:12, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you use the : to indent the page? I have added a Fact tag on the section in question and other editors will know that it needs a source that says it was "the most powerful" except blah blah. I personally think that statement needs a specific ref to verify it.--Inayity (talk) 12:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

text: "quite obviously have not ready any of the prince sources" is not what I wrote. Anyone can look up the page to see what I did write (which is perfectly coherent), so I have no idea why you've resorted to lying about it. You manifestly also are edit warring. Pinkbeast (talk) 15:58, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

text: "is not what I wrote"
Lol, are you serious bruh?
It says it right there in your post, the only person who's lying here is you son, check your vision or something.
I honestly don't even know how that basura in the legacy is still up, especially that first sentence.
I'm not gonna continue to argue with you dudes who keep saying the same trite stuff and one can't even form a sentence with semi-coherence.
I'm out, go ahead and keep that garbage legacy that is more poor than modern day Mali, lmao.
- Cau7ion (talk) 19:18, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

text: No, I didn't. I wrote that you "quite obviously have not read any of the print sources". You claimed I wrote "quite obviously have not ready any of the prince sources", a statement which is not true. Pinkbeast (talk) 02:02, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

text: The discussion just below this is that which justified removing it. This discussion with Cau7ion was before that. Pinkbeast (talk) 19:37, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legacy 

message: WP:LEAD The current lead does not summarize the topic, for example one of the most notable pieces of information-- the Hajj, is missing. Yet specifics about his territory are included. --169.0.4.74 (talk) 08:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you would care to suggest a new wording? Not being facetious; give it a bash. Pinkbeast (talk) 19:40, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  WP:LEAD 

message: I have discussed the issues with "mansa" == "king of kings" at Talk:Mansa (title); please look in there. It seems more useful to discuss it there rather than here. Pinkbeast (talk) 14:22, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mansa 

message: Some of the sources in this article seem to be modern European scholars referring to slightly older European scholars who refer to somewhat older European scholars without saying where the information originates from. The article would become more reliable, if someone could find references to contemporary accounts or archaeological evidence.
The particular point I tried to get a confirmation of was the alleged currency crisis he would have caused with his spending of gold. I even found one source (Lady Lugard's A Tropical Dependency, 1905, page 124), which says that he did not spend much in Mecca or Medina.
It would be impossible to get absolute certainty about this, but more reliable sources would be welcome. --Mlewan (talk) 12:57, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  More and older sources available? 

message: I decided to evaluate an article about Mansa Musa.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musa_I_of_Mali
Everything in this article is related to the topic, and I found it to be very interesting because it doesn't go on any rabbit trails. Nothing in this article seems to be biased, although I believe this isn't by choice. This is because his life isn't that well documented and there isn;t much to say about his personality. The viewpoints seem underrepresented, but only because the life of Mansa Musa is still a somewhat mystery. What I thought was strange, however, is how accurate the time of his reign was displayed on the article, since everything else seems to be up in the air. 
One question I would ask is if we have more paintings or descriptions of what he looked like.
:The time of his reign is prepended "c." - circa. It is not displayed to great precision. Pinkbeast (talk) 12:52, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy of this article. 

message: As a result of polity  (WP:BRD inter alia), this section is intended to elicit comments supporting or not supporting that material. Collect (talk) 14:59, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The reverted additions were vandalism. They were simply an existing paragraph pasted over 30 times. Dr. K. 15:29, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I know - but wanted to adhere to "strict Wikipedianism"  here, lest the IP turn weird. :)  Collect (talk) 16:37, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. However, vandalism being an exemption from 3RR, the IP could get a "B" for block rather than for "B"RD. :) Dr. K. 19:26, 25 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  massive additions reverted 

message: The secondary paragraph below the header, needs some serious editing.
I would edit it, but i don't want to change any original text. So ideally, the one who has the original text to "it grows in our land", please quote it. Monk Bunny (talk) 05:36, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: {re|Monk Bunny}} they won't, they are an IP editor who hasn't edited this before and added something from a self-published book. But i've removed it, thanks. Doug Weller talk 11:00, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

text: Looks OK. O3000 (talk) 21:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of proper quotations and grammatical errors 

message: The article that is referenced quotes the Wikipedia page as a source of its information. So you have a Wikipedia article that cites a source, while the source is cites the same section of the article. What kind of circular logic is that? Not to mention the article is a commentary on current monetary policy and not at all academic in any way. It should definitely be removed.
:Someone noticed it was unsourced and added that. I've fixed the issue with an academic source. Doug Weller talk 15:10, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference #24 

message: Could we add an section for a list of statues and commemorations of Mansa Musa?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.64.103.27 (talk) 13:31, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely. I would recommend a title like "Legacy". However, it is very important that any information added is verifiable and supported by reliable sources. If it meets these requirements, his continuing legacy is definitely noteworthy. If you have questions please let me or another user know. Thanks ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia talk  15:40, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commemoration of Mansa Musa