Talk:Scramble for Africa

message: Hey, can someone please add also the title "Race for Africa"? Many scholar lit. uses that phrase and may be useful for us to apprend this
----
: This article should be moved to The Scramble for Africa. Martin 13:02, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ahh, that's better :) Martin 14:04, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Old comments

message: # Liberia was an independent country, albeit one with close tied to the US
# Italian occupation of Ethiopia came considerably later historically, so it's irrelevant here.  Guettarda 22:07, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Borderer's edits (reverted) 

message: There should be a map of colonial Africa, showing how it was divided.
:And perhaps that particular map shouldn't look like it's been drawn as a project in kindergarten? Dahn 18:46, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing wrong with the map. Wizzy…☎ 07:18, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've created a new, and to my mind better, map of colonial Africa circa 1914. Declangraham 19:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map? 

message: I've had a brief fruitless search for one. Anyone know if wiki has one? I think it might be a handy reference. PhilipPage 20:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about :category:Explorers of Africa and :category:Explorers or even :category:Exploration.  --Richard Clegg 22:40, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks Richard. PhilipPage 22:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of Explorers? 

message: this article is in grammatical disrepair-  counted three errors in just the first sentence of the de beers sidebar.  the writing style makes it very difficult to follow the progression of events and their connection to the larger issues as discussed.  additionally, not sure the term 'colored' is appropriate in this context.
68.233.255.90 06:43, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  article in serious need of editing 

message: The first paragraph states:
"Ongoing disputes necessitated the formation of alliances -- the Entente Cordiale, the Triple Entente, the Triple Alliance -- and led to the First World War.
Isn't this a too direct relation between these ententes and the outbreak of the war? The treaties may explain why the whole of Europe was in war in a matter of days, but are they the cause of it?
Response to the above
I agree with the above: the sentence in question is misleading and has no place here.  Only the Entente Cordiale-whibvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
ch was not an alliance-can be said to have touched upon Africa in any direct sense, and that was to settle outstanding disputes between Britain and France.  Neither the Triple Alliance nor the Triple Entente had any bearing on the question of Africa.
White Guard 23:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  direct connection between entente's and WW I ? 

message: This article, and the accompanying map, suggests that the Free State of Congo/Congo Free State was under Belgium control. This how ever is not true, the Free State of Congo was, from 1885 to 1908, private property of King Leopold II of Belgium, in accordance with the Berlin Conference. After 1908 the Free State of Congo became Belgium territory and the name was changed in Belgium Congo. Mach10 08:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not if you read slowly: "Léopold II, who personally owned the colony starting in 1885 and exploited it for ivory and rubber, would impose such a terror regime on the colonized people that Belgium decided to annex it in 1908." That's fairly accurate, isn't it? Lapaz 15:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Congo Free State

message: It is known as "The Scramble for Africa", including the definite article "the". That is the way it was called when the term was coined in 1884. Correct me if I'm wrong. I've renamed it once before, but since this is on the verge of a low-scale revert war, I'll rename it again only if there is no strong opposition. --Ezeu 17:39, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Renaming it. --Ezeu 02:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverting rename. Yes, it's always known with "the", but that's a matter of grammatical convention, not part of an official title. Compare this article to Middle East, it's always, 100% of the time called "The Middle East", but that doesn't make it appropriate to insert that as part of the title, because it is Wikipedia convention to remove "The" unless it's an official part of a title of a movie, book, song, etc. -Silence 11:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definite article "the" 

message: The heading "A succession of international crises leading to World War I" seemed to me to imply a direct causal link between the crises listed and WWI, whereas I would think that only the Moroccan crisis is mentioned in the article on causes of WWI. So I revised the heading to "A succession of crises in the period to World War I"; perhaps someone else can think of a better wording. "International" seemed superfluous since the whole article is international. Rexparry sydney 05:45, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The heading "A succession of international crises leading to World War I"  

message: I've removed this section.
Capitalism, an economic system in which capital, or wealth, is put to work to produce more capital, revolutionized traditional economies, inducing social changes and political consequences that revolutionized African and Asian societies. Maximizing production and minimizing cost did not necessarily coincide with traditional, seasonal patterns of agricultural production. The ethic of wage productivity was thus, in many respects, a new concept to supposedly 'idle natives' merely accustomed to older patterns of production. Balanced, subsistence-based economies shifted to specialization and accumulation of surpluses. Tribal states or empires organized along precarious, unwritten cultural traditions also shifted to a division of labor based on legal protection of land and labor — once inalienable, but now commodities to be bought, sold, or traded.
It belongs in a section on colonialism in Africa, but not the 'Scramble'.  These economic changes occurred both before and after the formation of colonial states, and the article doesn't even attempt to link cash cropping with the partition of Africa.  The summary is also unreferenced and inaccurate: it implies that African economies were subsistence-based, egalitarian (I presume, since 'accumulation' was apparently a novelty), and static (inalienable rights to land and labour).  None of these things are true.
The article needs a lot of work - it is currently based on limited, dated sources with a clear ideological bias.
Sunjata 23:21, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed section on cash crops 

message: Why does it keep saying it like this?  It's almost like "Liberal" is a title or his last name, which I know it's not.  Is there some reason I shouldn't take out that link and just leave the link to the man? CumbiaDude 19:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No reason at all, you're right that it shouldn't be there, I've done it and also edited around it. Rexparry sydney 00:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  William Gladstone (Liberal) 

message: Proposed additions:
#In the Berlin Conference, The Principle of Effectivity (or of Effective Occupation), that stated that powers could only hold colonies if they actually possessed them (etc.), also was approved by the newer colonialists in the stead of the principle of historical rights proposed by Portugal.
#The Portuguese Pink Map collided with Sir Cecil Rhodes "Cape to Cairo" Red Line. The dispute with England over these territories led to the British Ultimatum, to which  Portugal gave in and the small obstacle that the Portuguese Empire was, was removed from the race.
Xyzt1234 20:52, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Pink Map 

message: Researching to add a smattering of African perspective on the Monarch article, I ran across this intriguingly anachronistic and quite offensive article in the New York Times that seems to fit quite nicely to this page. Thankfully, they have recently opened up their archives, so this article from 1882 documents a Colonial perspective of "purchasing" kingdoms in Africa. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9B00EFDD1530E433A25754C2A9679D94639FD7CF
I don't have time at the moment to properly make edits, so I am dropping it on the talk page for other's consideration... the article begins:
It provides an interesting view of how Europeans justified the rush for control in Africa.--Marcinjeske (talk) 05:11, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "purchase" of kingdoms 

message: The image :Image:TintinCongo.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --14:14, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:TintinCongo.jpg

message: Tanganyika should be mentioned as a British colony.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.34.71 (talk) 14:21, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tanganyika 

message: It has been mentioned before, why is this here? It is before the time period. It contains factual errors (reading related articles it appears Bushrod Washington was the first president of the ACS). It contains POV (linking Liberia and the Monroe doctrine). It is under causes; how did Liberia cause the scramble for Africa any more than Sierra Leone or any other earlier colony did? It is also uncited. I intend to remove this in the next couple of days if no one can supply a good reason (and citations) as to why this should be here, at best it should be in a background section and modified to eliminate POV. 75.187.75.140 (talk) 03:43, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I felt it was indeed appropriate to delete that whole section on Liberia which is out of place since this page is about the Scramble for Africa (roughly 1870-1914) --Lubiesque (talk) 13:44, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liberia 

message: The lack of focus on African resistance to European aggression makes this article structurally weak.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ackees (talk • contribs) 13:40, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  LACK OF FOCUS ON RESISTANCE MAKES THIS ARTICLE WEAK 

message: Some of the facts in the lede seem a little dubious at best. Did the European powers really form a "continental united front", for instance? Surely war in Europe was not particularly abated during the 1800s, and wouldn't the 'scramble' itself serve as evidence that the European powers were not all in agreement with each other? In fact, the second sentence implies exactly the same thing: the many conferences and delegations were convened precisely to prevent the imperial lust from spilling over into intra-European war. Terrasweet (talk) 17:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: Which one is actually better for this article? Which one is less ambiguous to color-blind people?
The PNG file has bee used on heare, and the page was put on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Articles_with_images_not_understandable_by_color_blind_users . Either the PNG is better than the SVG, and the category tag needs to be removed, or vice versa. Thoughts?
Travürsa (talk) 23:30, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The former (PNG) is ugly, but at least there is good contrast between relatively saturated colours (maybe it would be possible to change a colour for the benefit of conventionally colour-blind viewers). I think that the latter (SVG) is both detailed and attractive (beauty is in the eye of the beholder, of course  but the pastel hues might not have enough contrast for some readers. Is it possible take the latter one back to the workshop for a slight tweak? It could also be helpful to find a different colour for either French or German colonies - two different blues are not ideal. However, all that is just my opinion and I'm no visual expert. bobrayner (talk) 01:55, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Map 

message: This article does not say enough about economics. The African colonies had economies based on a single commodity, generally, which made their economies very unstable and at the mercy of world commodity markets. If the price of the commodity went down, it meant a significant contraction in the colony's economy. This outlasted the era of colonization, as many independent countries did not diversify their economies after de-colonization. This was a direct cause of the Rwandan Genocide, for example.--Wikigold96 (talk) 16:38, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economics 

message: The partitioning of Europe may be seen as a way for the Africans to eliminate the threat of a Africa-wide war over Europe.
Utter nonsense, isn't it? Yet on this very important article, we see this kind of sentence in the first paragraph. It might be a nice palliative for the Europeans, this sentence, but I don't think it is doing anyone any favors.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.55.65.71 (talk) 10:55, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Role Reversal 

message: Shouldn't the map include the Dervish State in what is now Somalia?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.238.32.104 (talk) 11:43, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: I am by no means an expert, but it seems to me that the Second Boer War should be listed under the section listing crises preceding World War I. That and the Agadir crisis/Panther incident. Parsecboy (talk) 15:43, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: That looks like a good idea to me. bobrayner (talk) 16:08, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Boer War 

message: This sentence seems unrelated to the topic of this section and should be deleted:
:According to von Tirpitz, this aggressive naval policy was supported by the National Liberal Party rather than by the conservatives, implying that imperialism was supported by the rising middle classes.[6]
Perhaps it belongs elsewhere is this or another article.
Zulu Kane (talk) 15:18, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Strategic rivalry 

message: I do not understand the use of the word "relayed", twice, in the second paragraph.  Is this some word that didn't translate correctly from German??
Zulu Kane (talk) 16:02, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Germany's Weltpolitik 

message: This is the paragraph I deleted, because it makes no reference whatsoever to Africa:
:On the other hand, the British abandoned their "splendid isolation" in 1902 with the Anglo-Japanese Alliance, which gave the Empire of Japan the opportunity to pursue war with Russia without the risk of Russia's allies taking arms against Japan. Japan was victorious during the war against Russia (1904–1905). In 1904 the British signed the Entente cordiale with France, and in 1907 this became the Triple Entente with the addition of Russia — effectively a system of alliances pitted against the Triple Alliance, which Bismarck had patiently assembled.
Furthermore, it has no citation.
- Zulu Kane (talk) 18:03, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: While pretending to advocate humanitarianism and denounce slavery, Leopold II used the most inhumane tactics to exploit his newly acquired lands. His crimes were revealed by 1905, but he remained in control until 1908, when he was forced to turn over control to the Belgian government.
- Zulu Kane (talk) 18:26, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

text: Italy's expansion 
- Zulu Kane (talk) 18:36, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clash of rival imperial powers 

message: This parenthetical quotation was in the middle of an already long sentence about Cecil Rhodes:
:(who once declared, "all of these stars... these vast worlds that remain out of reach. If I could, I would annex other planets"S. Gertrude Millin, Rhodes, London, 1933, p. 138.) 
While it is quite colorful, it's barely relevant in this context.  Readers interested in Cecil Rhodes can already find it on his Wikipedia page.  In short, it seems unnecessary and distracting here.  So I deleted it.
- Zulu Kane (talk) 02:06, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good work. bobrayner (talk) 00:24, 9 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colonization of the Congo 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Scramble for Africa. 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/20090410092604/http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/08/30/daily/leopold-book-review.html to http://www.nytimes.com/books/98/08/30/daily/leopold-book-review.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 23:04, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Substituted at 05:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: This is a minor issue but on muitiple maps I've seen throughout this article and all across the web of the completed Scramble for Africa show clearly Egypt controlling the southern portion of Cyrenaica. I find this to be problematic as there is no treaty or expedition of any sorts that I could find that Egypt annexed this area apart from a treaty in the 1920s giving the area to the Italian colony of Libya.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.106.142.1 (talk) 18:55, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Egyptian Borders  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Scramble for Africa. 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/20110819201458/http://www.arte.tv/fr/connaissance-decouverte/aventure-humaine/Cette_20semaine/1291022.html to http://www.arte.tv/fr/connaissance-decouverte/aventure-humaine/Cette_20semaine/1291022.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) 16:11, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Scramble for Africa. 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/20081207015726/http://www.gresham.ac.uk/event.asp?PageId=45&EventId=696 to http://www.gresham.ac.uk/event.asp?PageId=45&EventId=696
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111004005739/http://www.minefe.gouv.fr/fonds_documentaire/notes_bleues/nbb/nbb270/entente_cordiale.pdf to http://www.minefe.gouv.fr/fonds_documentaire/notes_bleues/nbb/nbb270/entente_cordiale.pdf
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) 10:36, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Scramble for Africa. 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/20110427034124/http://www.africanews.com/site/Africas_population_now_1_billion/list_messages/26588 to http://www.africanews.com/site/Africas_population_now_1_billion/list_messages/26588
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) 12:22, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't think the claim that the scramble caused world war I is accurate or credible. Really I don't see that section as relevant at all to the topic at hand and think it should be taken out.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:86B:4A00:E0E7:A70E:E59D:AF23 (talk) 22:13, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re: cause of World War I 

message: Sagallo is not mentioned.--134.153.2.217 (talk) 19:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sagallo? 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:08, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:09, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: I think a timeline of when each present-day African state was initially colonised would be useful to get a picture of the progress of conquest. Or alternatively, a map colour-coded for conquest by decade (or 5 year period). If independence dates were also shown that would be fab. And no, before some smartass comes along and suggest I do it, I have neither the know-how nor inclination to make such a thing myself! But if any brilliant person would like to do so they will have my thanks :) LastDodo (talk) 16:12, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline would be useful 

message: Hi Dabaqabad; Which of the seven citations you removed is unreliable? Heesxiisolehh (talk) 23:40, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which of the seven? 

message: Asses the cases of the scramble for africa leading to partition 41.75.216.74 (talk) 07:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of :Scramble for Africa's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
Reference named "sarkin":
From Herero and Namaqua genocide: Jeremy Sarkin-Hughes (2008) Colonial Genocide and Reparations Claims in the 21st Century: The Socio-Legal Context of Claims under International Law by the Herero against Germany for Genocide in Namibia, 1904–1908, p. 142, Praeger Security International, Westport, Conn. 
From Herero Wars: Jeremy Sarkin-Hughes (2008) Colonial Genocide and Reparations Claims in the 21st Century: The Socio-Legal Context of Claims under International Law by the Herero against Germany for Genocide in Namibia, 1904-1908, p. 142, Praeger Security International, Westport, Conn. 
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 03:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orphaned references in [[:Scramble for Africa]] 

message: Die oorskake van kolonisering in Afrika 102.165.192.148 (talk) 10:04, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geskidenes 

message: Why is there this sub-section on Petrostates. It does not seem to clearly connect. It either needs to be removed or else it needs to be explained clearer to show connections to other sections. 35.20.209.10 (talk) 18:41, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Petrostates