Talk:Biffeche

Apparently, the article actually was not ever properly nominated for deletion, so noone ever closed the "Vfd", because the link had only been posted on the article, please see WP:VFD#How_to_list_pages_for_deletion. Step III is somewhat important. GeeJo (talk) 01:44, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Needs more references

I'm having trouble finding anything on the web for this besides Biffeche's own site. The whole thing's odd enough that I'm very uncomfortable not having more references on this--a kingdom run by an American in Senegal that co-rules a kingdom in Ghana? I can't find it referred to in Academic Search Premier or JSTOR either; unless somebody can post a news story or related item about this soon, I'm worried Wiki may be perpetuating someone's hoax here. (At least two anons have posted here feeling this was the case, and sadly, been ignored, as above...) --Dvyost 07:54, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

This goes for Bethio too. --Dvyost 07:54, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Here's one small reference

Here is one published reference to the previous king. A search of the city newpaper index in St. Louis, Mo., exhibits this obituary of the person called King Edward I of Biffeche:

http://www.slpl.lib.mo.us/libsrc/obit98c.htm

where he is called "H. R. H."

"Schafer, (H.R.H.) Edward C. 6/3, (photo) #6/4"

======================================

The actual obituary costs a fee to download, but the first few paragraphs are free:

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=list&p_topdoc=11

-------------------

EDWARD C. SCHAFER

PR MAN, WAS MADE TRIBAL KING

St. Louis Post-Dispatch June 4, 1998

Section: METRO Edition: FIVE STAR LIFT

Page B5 Word count: 302

ID#: 9806040417

memorial Mass for Edward C. Schafer, a former reporter and public relations man here who was elected king of an African tribe in the 1960s, will be celebrated at 11 a.m. today at St. Anselm Catholic Church, 530 South Mason Road, Creve Coeur. The body was cremated.

Mr. Schafer, 75, of west St. Louis County, died April 4, 1998, of cancer at the Westview Nursing and Rehabilitation Center in West County. In 1963, Mr. Schafer became king of the African tribe of Biffeche in the Republic of

Download the full text of this story ($2.95).

---------------------

This seems to be an independent, published "verifiable" reference to his kingship in the 1960's, although Biffeche is called a "tribe". The St. Louis Post-Dispatch has been the mainstream newspaper of record in St. Louis, Mo. (since the closing of the St. Louis Globe-Democrat several years before).

67.101.68.58 06:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Article structure

It seems to me that a lot of this article is probably correct. Where it starts to become improbable is in the appropriation of the genuine historical kingdom by a modern micronation of dubious provenance. So mostly I think the article needs to be re-written to keep what's real and delete what's not. Dlyons493 Talk 12:29, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

• • I'm going to be bold and do just that. Dlyons493 Talk 15:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, though, we can't really put in articles by "probability," but only by sources. I'm not comfortable with even one sentence remaining here that we can't find a citation for. --Dvyost 16:15, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Even though you've removed the most obvious dubious content, most of what remains still was present in the original edit - the same edit that included the bit about the American being proclaimed king. I don't see how we can destruct this article into anything proper. It needs to be constructed anew based on credible sources. If that's not possible, then it's much better to have no article. ×Meegs 16:47, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Copied back from User talk:Dvyost to maintain discussion unity: Hi, Have a look at ref 29 in [1] re the history - that looks reputable and citable to me. I doubt if there are any sources for the modern village but don't imagine that anyone would particularly want to invent that material - suggest you just delete it if you're uncomfortable with it (personally I'm prepared to take that bit on trust as it fits with the little I know about the region)? Dlyons493 Talk 16:35, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Can you give me the page you're looking at in that PDF document? I don't seem to be having any luck searching for Biffeche in it (though I did find Bethio, much to my relief--worried we had a couple of fictional kingdoms in here). --Dvyost 17:00, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

reference 29 on page 43. Bifeche with one f ×Meegs 17:05, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! So if I'm reading this right, the kingdom of the little Brak appears to be named Gangueul, with a capital at Maka, on the island of Bifeche? I'm glad to see that Brak is actually the correct term for this--I figured that was just put in by a Space Ghost fan... --Dvyost 17:13, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Re History - I've also found a ref to F. THÉSÉE, Actes du colloque de Nantes, tome I, 1988, p. 223 à 245 which seems in general agreement - there's an extract at [2]

RE Geography and ethnography I think Google can verify those adequately - try Parc du Djoudj and e.g. [3] for the tribes. Even the tomato industry is plausible although unconfirmed e.g. [4]

Dlyons493 Talk 21:35, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Never thought I'd spend Christmas Eve verifying tomatoes! Sad!! But satisying!!! See [5] Dlyons493 Talk 22:01, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Dlyons, you're rapidly becoming my new wikihero for your stellar research here (and double kudos for the holiday overtime). Over the next couple of days let's rework this with your references point-by-point--I feel we need to be extra careful with this one--and then ask folks to change their vote on the AfD. The last thing I think we need to reword here is the idea of the "Kingdom of Biffeche"; it still looks to me as if the island is named Biffeche and once held a loosely organized polity named Gangueul, under the Waalo--is this your understanding, too? So far as I can tell you've confirmed everything else that remains. Again--you rock. --Dvyost 23:55, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

That's all pretty much my view also. Thanks for the compliment and very well done to you for spotting the ancient nonsense in the first place. Dlyons493 Talk 02:31, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

More digging

Obviously this is getting into original research, but it is of background interest if any fancies investigation. A number of Senegal tourism websites mention Savoigne: such as this one - no reference to any kingdom - and this one, which mentions "Savoigne (le royaume de Bifèche)".

I also found a website for Saint Blaise Statues, a Catholic mission and factory school in Savoigne, with contact details for Père Emmanuel Zanaboni - who must be the same guy who gets the diatribe in the FAQ2 at the Kingdom of Biffeche website. Tearlach 03:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Satellite images

I believe both of the satellite images linked are way off, though I'm not comfortable enough with the geography to fix them. The one in-line is a little too far south in the delta, and the one in the external links is about 100 miles east of the delta. Things have definitely changed since the antique maps were drawn, but it seems to me that the island is somewhere here, but not easily distinguishable because the water to its east is not visible. I could easily be wrong, but in any case, the satellite images are not useful enough to be cited inside the article. ×Meegs 05:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Once you've found a particular position in google maps, remember that you have to click Link to this page to regenerate the correct URL for any panning and zooming that you've done ×Meegs 05:57, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

The fake "scholarship" of Dlyons493 who vandalised the Kingdom of Biffeche information earlier (removing every reference to the modern American kings of the kingdom) is clearly exhibited if one examines carefully his "scholarly" references. The first few refererences are quite proper, such as the book by Dr. Boubacar Barry on Waalo, which mentions the Kingdom of Biffeche several times. But his satellite view links are PSEUDO references, since they point to other parts of Senegal nowhere near Biffeche. In addition, several of his references and web links are wrong in the sense of being irrelevant to Biffeche. They are just general Senegal links and sources to give his anti-kingdom vandalism the "atmosphere" -- illusion -- of a scholarly correction. They have nothing to do with Biffeche. In fact the last sentence of his article (in French and in English) shows this "scholarship" fakery. It is the so-learned remark: "In the 1720s, the Brak of Waalo was Erim M'Bagnick and Béquio Malicouri, king of the Royaume d'Oral (Bethio), was his vassal." which, although correct, has nothing whatever to do with Biffeche, but creates the illusion that this Dlyons493 is concerned to get the history right, rather than the true aim which was to censor out all the true (and now documented and verified) information about the modern Kingdom of Biffeche. See the documentary references below. The French version of the Biffeche page is also by him, and is of course a misleading distortion and politically biased pseudo-scholarly vandalism just like the (current) English-language version. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.101.69.197 (talk • contribs) 2007 May 3 03:21 UTC.

Please tone-down your rhetoric, it is not conducive to our collaborative project. You are right that the satellite maps are not terribly useful, and perhaps we should remove them, however, no one has yet presented any reliable sources about a modern kingdom with American kings. If you have any specific problems with the article, or Dlyons's sources, please describe them at the bottom of this page. ×Meegs 04:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

"... no one has yet presented any reliable sources about a modern kingdom with American kings." That's untrue. Have you seen the Esquire Magazine article reference "All Hail the King of Biffeche!" Esquire, 1975, V.83 No. 3, 1975, and the article reference "Edward C. Schafer, P.R. Man, was Made Tribal King", St. Louis Post-Dispatch June 4, 1998? Both articles have been properly cited in this discussion page, in compliance with Wikipedia sourcing standard WP:RS. Both are clearly "about a modern kingdom with American kings", and the latter is on the Web. If you read this whole discussion you will also note that a Senegalese tour company located nearby takes people now to "le Royaume de Biffeche" which means "Kingdom of Biffeche" (see http://www.ranchbango.com/circuit_thioubalo.htm already discussed above). See also the Lonely Planet quote, and other references in this discussion This "no sources" canard really should come to a stop.ChoppityChop 18:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Death notices are usually written by the family of the deceased, and not fact-checked by the newspaper. The Esquire article has potential as a source, but we can not cite your recollections from reading it "a long time ago", or use them to infer that the information on kingdomofbiffeche.net is reliable. We can all continue talking about using the Esquire article in the related thread at the bottom of this page. ×Meegs 04:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Consider actually reading the cited articles. These are totally verifiable references by Wikipedia standards. These articles confirm the basic facts about the Kingdom of Biffeche and its American king Edward I 1963-circa1974. No one has cited these two articles "...to infer that the information on kingdomofbiffeche.net is reliable." (i.e. the kingdom's webpage at http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net ) -- a demonstration that would be unnecessary and not pertinent to Wikipedia -- only that they verify the basic historical facts about the American king of an African kingdom, facts that were deleted from the Wikipedia Biffeche article by the hostile 'French edits' on the grounds of "no published references" and "spam". (Also, the Post-Dispatch obituary article would be based on "morgue files" of prior news stories; it is not in the form of a family-composed "Death Notice". See Obituary. A. We have no reason to believe that this obituary was "...not fact-checked by the newspaper.", and B. that's irrelevant since the issue under WP:RS is only whether there is a supporting published verification, not anyone's subjective opinion about its journalistic reliability.)ChoppityChop 06:29, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

What makes you say that the 340-word piece is not a death listing and was in fact written by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch staff? ×Meegs 08:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Please directly ask the St. Louis Post-Dispatch staff which of these it in fact is -- in lieu of a potential regress of "And what is your provable basis for THAT?" questions to me. Their authority will be more acceptable, and if they can provide "morgue files" (old, citeable clippings about the Kingdom of Biffeche) as I anticipated above, it will enable you to contribute splendidly to vindicating the American kings of Biffeche wronged in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biffeche, Talk:Biffeche pages, and prior edit comments.ChoppityChop 13:59, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if you go to their Archives search and search for Biffeche, you find two copies: one in the Metro section and one in the Obits. The former - EDWARD C. SCHAFER, PR MAN, WAS MADE TRIBAL KING - can be assumed to have been through editorial checking. Only $2.95. Tearlach 16:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

The following satellite image thumbnail includes all of the Kingdom of Biffeche, from Dios [6] in the southwest to Old Ronk [7] in the northeast, the mainland, and (too much) more, but unfortunately it's not zoom-able like the irrelevant Google Senegal images.ChoppityChop 01:09, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Satellite image of the Kingdom of Biffeche and environs.

Since the Biffeche article and this discussion page could have confusing edit histories, let's note that, as of May 10, 2007, the satellite map images posted in the past by Dlyons493 in his revisions of the Biffeche page in Dec. 2005, and not corrected by anyone yet, are misleading because they are of various distant parts of Senegal far from Biffeche. (One of them denoted by him "Islands in the Delta" [8] is really a map of the Saloum River delta in the South of Senegal, and another [9] is an apparently random spot in the desert hundreds of kilometers to the southeast of Biffeche.)ChoppityChop 22:06, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure who you are talking to. Why don't you ahead and correct or removed the links? ×Meegs 22:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

You're a Wikipedia Administrator -- you can fix it. Your edits are less likely to be reverted 5 minutes later by the online "expungers of the Biffeche kingdom". You know how to fight that fight; I don't. I'm documenting the fact that it needs fixing. Also helping expose the nature of the Dec. 2005 politically-motivated edits, and the unctuous congratulating (which should not be unfamiliar). An impression of "attention to accurate references" was successfully created by the participants and magnified by the congratulants. I've shown that in fact there was no interest in accuracy. Wikipedia editing of any controversy is all about power and tenacity (e. g., the Intelligent Design disgrace). You have some responsibility for what was done to the Biffeche page, and you have Administrator powers; you can act on the information here if you choose.ChoppityChop 00:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, let's start again the cartography. See below. But please quit the conspiracy-theory moans: Dlyons493 is no longer here. Tearlach 01:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I see you're fixing some things, Tearlach. Here's a more accurate satellite map link for Biffeche but biased toward the southwest part: BIFFECHE. I can't control the boundaries because it adjusts to the window ChoppityChop 00:08, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I've removed the USGS image and re-centered the link to Google Maps. ×Meegs 09:02, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

That's good. Of the remaining links, currently:

External links

* Google Maps satellite image of the Senegal River delta

* Area Map

* Islands of the Delta

* History (in French)

* Ethnicity (in French)

* Religion (in French)

* Senegalese History and Geography (mainly in French)

* Horticulture (in French)

* Parc du Djoudj

* Indigenous chief Béquio Malicouri

only "Area Map" (an article in French about cattle containing a map) and "Parc du Djoudj" are relevant. The others are either wholly irrelevant ("Islands of The Delta" is actually a list of places all over Senegal beginning with "Ile" through "Ito") or generic web articles in French about Senegal that belong, if anywhere, on the French-language Senegal page. The last, "Indigenous chief Béquio Malicouri" belongs on the Bethio page (where it is already), though an article in English might be better.ChoppityChop 10:33, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

For edit record clarity, those links (along with the maps pointing to irrelevant places) were inserted by DLyons493 as references provided with the removal of all mention of the American kings of Biffeche. One was acknowledged as such: 00:25, 27 December 2005 Dlyons493 (Talk | contribs) (Added Béquio Malicouri (admittedly of marginal relevance!)). Good historical maps came from JJay.ChoppityChop 20:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Not a hoax!

The modern micronation of Biffeche absolutely does exist. A close relative of mine spent several months there (he is a friend of King Ronald) working. I can produce photographs if desired. It is indeed a strangely set up place, with the American king and all, but that's all the more reason to include information about it here. Barring objection, I'm going to re-add the removed information about modern Biffeche (without removing the article's current content of course), although I concede that I cannot provide any websites that prove its existence. Like I said, however, I do have photographs of the grave/monument to King Edward, as well as other Biffeche scenes if there is still skepticism. As for the anthem, it does indeed exist, although I am unsure as to whether it is actually ever played in Biffeche, so I won't resurrect that article. Elmer Clark 07:50, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Elmer, I'm afraid Wikipedia strictly prohibits this sort of original research; check out WP:NOR. Please do not readd this information until such verification is found. We're going to need some kind of print source to verify its existence... any ideas on where we could find one? --Dvyost 08:41, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. Currently the only published source for the existence of this micronation is its own website. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources on the point of personal websites as primary sources: "we should proceed with great caution and should avoid relying on information from the website as a sole source. This is particularly true when the subject is controversial, or has no professional or academic standing". Tearlach 12:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, fair point. This is a rather interesting situation...the fact that most interest in the place would be merely trivial makes it pretty unlikely that a whole lot of info about it would be available anywhere, which is apparently the case. It just seems against the spirit of Wikipedia for information provable to be true to be removed. Still, I suppose there's nothing to be done about it, except hope they strike oil and CNN covers it. -Elmer Clark 23:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

It just seems against the spirit of Wikipedia for information provable to be true to be removed'.

I'm not sure what you mean. Everyone else here has been working exactly by the spirit of Wikipedia, which is that verifiability, not truth is the criterion. Because the standard fact-checking procedures used by other publications can't be relied on (anyone here can claim what they like) only material in reputable publications is treated as a valid source. There are hints that could be traced. www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/history.htm says of King Edward I that "Esquire magazine had an article on his Kingdom". So find it.

Off the record, I think it's a very interesting situation. There's plenty of collateral information if we get into original research. We can look up Ronald Reisinger's list of honours ("Baron of Culbin, Garlies, Carstairs and the territorial earldom of Crawfurd-Lindsay and Laird of Ascog") [10] and conclude that they're defunct titles for crappy bits of Scotland that he bought for cash. You can check out the aristocrats of Biffeche and find that, say, "The Ladies Ann and Ellen Fusz, who have long been staunch financial supporters of the Kingdom" are a couple of retired teachers in the St Louis Opera Guild, St Louis, Missouri. And so on.

But as you say, until they strike oil and CNN covers it, this is all by-the-by. Tearlach 01:58, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't quite mean that. I just meant that it seems odd that verifiably true information (albeit not verifiable within the Wikipedia guidelines) would be removed from an article. Like I said though, I recognize that its removal was completely in keeping with Wikipedia guidelines.

And regarding the king, I'm not entirely sure how seriously he takes all this, but the people of Biffeche do recognize him as their king (for the sake of money no doubt). -Elmer Clark 02:20, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

HOAX? MAYBE, BUT IF SO IT'S A CURIOUSLY PLAUSIBLE ONE.

The story on the "Befeche website" is that the king of Befeche (an African, of an ancient dynasty) was childless and willed his kingdom to an American because the American was a benefactor financially and in other ways, and that the people of this little tribe or band of people consequently regard him as their king, and lastly that he keeps a low profile (no interviews, no granting of "titles" to jokers who pay for it, no nothing). The web site also says Befeche is "a part of the Republic of Senegal" and "non-secessionist", i.e. it doesn't claim to be independent. Since there are lots of African republics that recognize traditional local "kings" and "kingdoms" within their territories, the story isn't especially implausible or unlikely. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.93.65.103 (talk • contribs)

I can certainly confirm that it's not a hoax, and have plenty of photographic evidence that could prove it - but no credible sources. Still hoping to find some (I know that Biffeche has been covered in American newspapers, but I'm having trouble actually digging up any articles). Hopefully one will turn up eventually... -Elmer Clark 01:03, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks Like There Was a Political Censorship Edit Campaign Against the Kingdom

The strong effort to use edits to extinguish every reference in wikipedia to the kingdom of biffèche (describing it only as "a former island", what ever that means!) may have had a political motivation. (Look at the pattern of edits by antiking elements from France.) They called the biffèche kingdom "hoax" and "spam" over and over again in edits which was evidently improper and false and unfair, even if the kingdom's original article was in fact quite poorly documented. Poorly documented (lack of references) does not equal "spam" or "hoax". Dlyons493 disguised his campaign by adding a lot of real, some relevant, scholarly references. That is good, but a thin disguise.

View here a local tour company of Sénégal that includes regular travel-tours of the kingdom of biffèche right now (February 2007):

http://www.ranchbango.com/circuit_thioubalo.htm

The text says:

"4ème jour : Atelier de brousse et parc national. Après le réveil dans le village et le petit déjeuner départ vers Savoigne (le royaume de bifèche), pour la visite de l’atelier de brousse de terre cuite du père italien Emmanuel de la paroisse Saint Blaise de Savoigne. Région peuplée de sérére catholique. Retour au Ranch de Bango pour le déjeuner."

which includes, in English: "depart for Savoigne (the Kingdom of Biffèche)..."

The campaigns of Dlyons493 and Dvyost against biffèche appear like a few turks destroying information on armenia, or other similarly biased distortions and painstakingly thorough wikipedia destructions. Even the Savoigne edits censored out all reference to the kingdom, which make Savoigne interesting.

To deny the kingdom history was wrong. There is a map in a book published in 1728, shown at:

http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k103380p/f166.table

On that map the claimed old capital of biffeche, Maka, is there.(http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/griotsong.htm says "For a while [a period of time], our kings lived at Maka. When they were called “Barak Biffeche”. Maka was our capital, then. But now it has fallen away. And Mboubène is our capital, now.") One sees clearly in the lower-centre of the old map: "Maca, residence du petit Braque" of Biffeche, which means "Maca, residence of the little king" (braque or barak) in English. Voila! The actual capital of Biffeche is also there at the place called "Emboulan" on the map which was in the wikepedia article "Mboubène" evidently also raided by the politico-vandals if you look at the old antikingdom edits. We also see that "Bequio" ("Hoval" also in Wikipedia as "Bethio") is shown as a PART of Biffèche in 1728, and Bequio only had a seigneur (lord) but not its own braque (king) as biffèche has.

On page 247 the "little king" of biffeche is described to have absolute power within his realm: http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k103380p.table

Both these present-day and ancient references showed in the very first two pages of Google results using "bifèche" in 2 minutes and I have not even looked at the rest. So the antibifèche campaign does not look to have been very sincere. (Note mutual public praises of the raiders: '"Dlyons, you're rapidly becoming my new wikihero for your stellar research here..." Dvyost') This manipulation was not research.

NOTE: Dlyons493 put only the censored no-kingdom "former island" on the French Wikipedia and he wrote it himself. A francophone wikipedia reader will see no trace of the political manipulations. Tumuli 01:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Aha, now I see that an old chart that Dlyons493 himself added in his scholarship (his 3rd old chart) shows something else: see http://visualiseur.bnf.fr/CadresFenetre?O=IFN-7759788&M=notice&Y=ImagesFixes and click on the "positive-sign" for the enlargement. There, after enlargement, you will see in very small writing, "Petit Brac" next to a dot, but see that the dot is not at Maca as before but is exactly at the location of Emboulan (or MBoubene ) claimed by the http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/griotsong.htm to be the capital of the kingdom or location of the king (brac, brak ou braque). How could one deny that the king of Bifèche has had his capital at MBoubene, given this? Tumuli 07:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

So correct it! As far as I can see, nobody here has any issue with reliably-sourced historical material on Biffeche/Bifèche. The 1728 Labat book looks a very good source, and should be incorporated. It is just the modern Kingdom of Biffeche that has insufficient documentation. www.kingdomofbiffeche.net, as a self-published website with no independent verification, isn't up to the standards required by WP:RS.

You suggest to "correct it" myself? I tried such a thing before within other controverted subjects. That becomes an unpleasant struggle during many days or weeks with the out-come determined by those with the highest "Wikipedia power" and the biggest amounts of infinite free time to dispute back-and-forth. One may argue for weeks, and even prevail obviously on every issue, then a person of "wikipedia adminstrator level X" settles the issue as he wishes. I will prefer to allow someone with higher "wikipedia power" than myself to correct the french censorships against the kingdom (on both french and english languages wikipedias). Tumuli 01:44, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure there is an entity of this name: the Lonely Planet Guide to Micronations book mentions it [11] - unfortunately only in the intro, to say that it isn't covering it (Nor are we profiling nations with disputed – but indisputably real – claims for nation status. There’s no Palestine in this book. No Somaliland, Azawad or Kingdom of Biffeche in Africa). But show us some third-party published reference for the more extensive detail: an article, a book, whatever. Tearlach 11:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Please, add any sourced information about Biffeche that you have. I have personal connections to Biffeche and would be very glad to see this on Wikipedia. If it is reliably sourced - and your sources look good - it cannot be removed for no reason, plain and simple. I would add it myself, but I can't read French, which makes many of these sources useless to me. However, I'm perfectly willing to help you with any Wikipedia procedure relating to citation of the sources, potential dispute resolutions, etc, which I am pretty familiar with. -Elmer Clark 04:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Biffeche Not an "Island"

Another peculiarity of the "French edits" is that they state that "Biffeche" is "the early name of a medium-sized island". Why would anything in Wikipedia be so referenced, by its early or former name? In fact it isn't a mere "early" name at all, it's current, and Biffeche isn't an "island" -- and it isn't even "in" Senegal, because at least two Biffeche villages due north of the Saint-Louis, Senegal Airport are in an in Mauritania, not in Senegal. Google Earth shows them (one is called Dios or Dyoos [12]) as being on some wet-season islands (islands only when surrounded by flooded areas in the rainy season), but they are definitely on the Mauritania side of the official border with Senegal, being on the west side of the main channel of the Senegal River. A large-scale map of French West Africa drafted by the US Army in the 1940s for the World War II, based on a French map of the 1920s, shows "B I F E C H E" as a large land area including not only the two large (and several small) "islands" but also an area of mainland Senegal southeast of the Marigot de Lampsar and across the main highway to Rosso. Less than half is the isle(s) in the 1700s maps linked-to above (where the "Isle de Biffeche" is marked as including several islands, including the entire Djoudj National Bird Sanctuary area). Biffeche is an area that includes a big area of mainland on the Senegal side, some intermittently flooded mainland on the Mauritania side, and Several riverine "islands" large and small, on both sides. ChoppityChop 07:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

One notes that the isle d'ntieng (or tieng or tiene), for example, is one, which is, on the kingdom sites, shown as part of biffèche in addition. The foto at the bottom of http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/events.htm shows the actual king leaving isle de tiene, sitting in a pirogue. Using "Google Earth" myself, which has excellent coverage of there, I find no evident villages of houses on isle de tiene. What was his majesté doing there, one wonders. The chart (the second) found in http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/history.htm is quite unclear because it supplies isle de tiene and this other area north from saint-louis-aerodrome-dakarbango in a different colour not of mauritanie or of sénégal or of bifèche itself but of a completely different colour of their own. Another page there calls this isle de tiene "mysterious". Tumuli 09:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

A problem with correlating maps is that terrain in river delta territory is very changeable. The shape of islands in the 1700s may well be rather different from the present day. Also, as I said, be cautious about using www.kingdomofbiffeche.net as a source unless it's substantiated elsewhere. Tearlach 09:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Wait----since all references to the kingdom are already assiduously removed by our french friends, there is nothing about it remaining in the main article now to "substantiate". Not so? You do not need to tell me to "be cautious" or to "substantiate" every remark and webquote I make in a discussion page. But now, since you mentioned it, these few following facts, which were REMOVED from the main page, are indeed already independently substantiated now: 1. It is now called "royaume de biffèche" locally (my tourism agency citation). 2. The american king Edward was elected king of biffèche in 1963 (the USA post-dispatch newspaper article about him, cited above). 3. The kingdom webpage claims about Mboubène being the new capital after Maka are vindicated (by my chart discoveries above). 4. The kingdom area is not a "former island" after all but a larger area including shore land in two countries, called BIFFECHE. (US/french army map reference just above, but needs date and title) I think it was quite a grave error of the kingdom staff to ignore everything that was done to them on wikipedia, for almost two years so far, because a lot of people will make a quick negative jugement based only on wikipedia.Tumuli 11:01, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Let me add that your own citation and quote from Lonely Planet listing the current "Kingdom of Biffeche" in the class with Somaliland suggests that it cannot be mere fiction.Tumuli 11:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree that there's such an entity, and it should be mentioned. But verification of the basic existence doesn't mean we buy into everything that is stated on www.kingdomofbiffeche.net. A trivial example of dubious information there: it's the sole source for the existence of the claimed "Biffeche Dragon, the second largest lizard in the world". Tearlach 12:51, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

That is leaving out the word "reputedly" in the original: [13] : "Biffeche is home to the Biffeche Dragon, reputedly the second-largest lizard in the world" (reputedly where?) and a discussion on the FAQ [14] openly mentions a controversy whether it even exisits at all as a separate species from the Nile monitor. Either way, such kind of side-issue-question would appear utterly irrelevant to the removal of all mention of the kingdom from wikipedia.Tumuli 14:04, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

On this reptilian digression, ... the Wikipedia article on the Nile Monitor has a map of that species' maximum distribution, at [15]. The Kingdom of Biffeche is on the Mauritania-Senegal border along the Senegal River. This is well outside the mapped distribution and habitat range of the Nile Monitor. Either the Wikipedia map is wrong, or the Biffeche Dragon, whatever it is (if it is anything), is not a Nile Monitor. According to http://moneynoobject.typepad.com/mno/people/index.html#entry-30786222 the Biffeche Dragon is a "slightly smaller version of the one in Komodo" (referring to the Komodo Dragon of Indonesia), while the Kingdom of Biffeche FAQ at http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/faq.htm claims that it definitely is not a variant of the Nile Monitor and is a different species.ChoppityChop 00:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

"...(US/french army map reference just above, but needs date and title)..." The full map reference for the 1942 Biffeche Topographic map is: War Department, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, "Africa, Senegal, St. Louis", South Sahara, N1600-W1600/30x32, A.M.S. G621, First Edition, 1942. It's in the Library of Congress map collection, the Perry-Castañeda Library Map Collection [16] at the University of Texas, with LC call number "G8810 S125 U5 # SAINT LOUIS", and probably also in the U. S. National Archives (based on [17]).

See further library reference below under Maps subsection.ChoppityChop 10:07, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The map shows "BIFECHE" written in large writing as covering areas northwest (south of the Marigot de Gorom) and southeast of the St. Louis-Rosso highway , including both the mainland in Senegal southeast of Marigot de Lampsar and large riverine islands beween Marigot de Lampsar and the Senegal River, but with no demarcation of Biffeche's northern or eastern borders (or any non-river border). The map has a note: "Modified from a French Map of Senegal, E28-11-2, dated 1924 by Army Map Service, U.S. Army, Washington, D.C. 1942, partial revision from R.A.F. aerial photographs". This map does not have the word "Kingdom" or "Royaume", or "Braque" or "Roi" like the older cited maps.

This is a third-party published reliable source under Wikipedia:Verifiability documenting the definitely-non-"island" extent of the traditional kingdom (or tribal or other area) of Biffeche ("Bifeche") in 1942 and presumably in 1924, but without marking the precise borders. This was well before the first American king of Biffeche was selected in 1963 by the local Biffeche Sereer elders of Mboubène (verified elsewhere). It is an independently verifiable piece of evidence that the opening statement in the current main article "Biffeche or Bifeche was the early name for a medium-sized island..." is misleadingly incomplete, if not false.ChoppityChop 08:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Modern Biffeche

Why is no mention of the (fabricated) 21st century Biffeche made in this article? The author of the site [18] has obviously gone to some length to promote his fantasy, and I believe it does deserve some mention. I know personally the man and story behind the 'modern Biffeche,' in that it is a complete fabrication and that the site is being used as an advertisment for selling royal titles (reading between the lines on the FAQ page, it doesn't take long to figure that one out). Perhaps with some clever sourcing and cross-referencing this fraudulent activity can be brought to rest, courtesy of Wikipedia editors? 24.94.113.184 18:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I largely agree with you. But, again, the problem is the complete lack of reliable third-party sources per WP:RS. Personal knowledge falls foul of the no original research, as does putting together all the bits and pieces and deducing. All we've got is the Kingdom of Biffeche site, which because of its exceptional claims really can't be used as a source without serious substantion (see WP:RS#Exceptional claims require exceptional sources). We've got the snippet about Edward Schaefer, and the non-fact that the Lonely Planet Micronations book says it isn't going to mention it. Can anyone find anything - newspaper, magazine, whatever - reporting in detail the current situation? You'd think such a good human interest story would be worth reporting. Tearlach 19:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Forgive my ignorance, but what does the "snippet about Edward Schaefer" concern? 24.94.113.184 19:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant Schafer - the section from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch obit quoted above. Tearlach 20:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Some statements above by 24.94.113.184 on 9 April 2007 are false. Citations are still needed, but the original Wikipedia article's information about the modern Kingdom of Biffeche with American kings (before it was all edited out later, probably for political reasons) was factual. The kingdom is not a "fabricated" "fantasy", and I know of no evidence that the current king Ronald I, or the previous American king of Biffeche, or the African kings before them, ever were "selling royal titles", as 24.94.113.184 specifically alleges. If 24.94.113.184 genuinely knows the current king, as claimed, he/she should know this, and should certainly cite one example of a "sold" title before making such an accusation. (If someone was honored with a title after building a hospital or clinic for poor Africans, that's not "selling titles".) There was a long article about the kingdom (specifically the previous American king, Edward I of Biffeche) published in Esquire Magazine in the early 1980's showing that the first American king was already reigning in Biffeche by 1963. I think the title was "All Hail the King of Biffeche" or something close. All someone has to do is find and cite that reference and it will demolish claims that the kingdom is some kind of web cyber fantasy. The royal family of Biffeche is powerful in America with estates and titles in Europe, Africa, America, etc., and is considered the richest family in the State of Missouri (possibly billionaires; see several discussions of this in the Usenet discussion group "rec.heraldry", and see the Wikipedia category Business families), so they're not likely to need to be selling any African titles to raise a few bucks. The fact that several thousand Africans consider him their king precludes the "fantasy" allegation anyway, although some will question the propriety of ANY African people choosing an American king (as in Biffeche, Ghana and some other African countries) --- usually solely because of race. If you merely disapprove of any American king reigning in Africa and you have no evidence of actual fraud, then it is inaccurate to call it "fraudulent"; just say you don't like it.ChoppityChop 06:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I was mistaken about the date of the Esquire Magazine article about the Kingdom of Biffeche; it was published in 1975, not the "early 1980's". See the actual citation/reference below.ChoppityChop 10:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Definite Published Reference to the Kingdom of Biffeche dated 1975!

OK, I just did a Google search on it which immediately gives this reference:

Esquire "The Magazine for Men" ... IN THIS ISSUE: ARTICLES:

"All Hail the King of Biffeche! That's his Royal Majesty; By the Grace of God, Ed Schafer to you." ... Issue Date: MARCH, 1975, VOLUME LXXXIII No. 3, WHOLE No. 496 ...

No one can say now that the Kingdom of Biffeche has no published references and only Web existence. The year 1975 was over 30 years ago, long before the World Wide Web even existed. Esquire Magazine is a main literary and journalistic magazine in America, one of the most prominent.

What's ridiculous is that anyone in this long (and partly spurious) Wikipedia "no published references to the kingdom" debate about Biffeche probably could have done the same Google search within ONE MINUTE, which would have yielded this Esquire Magazine article above and settled the question of documentation. The Esquire article is mentioned in the kingdom's own web page at http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/history.htm where it says "Esquire magazine had an article on his Kingdom."

It will probably take someone a long time to undo the damage done by the "French edits" pseudo-clean-up.ChoppityChop 10:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Unfair criticism. The Google hit you refer to is a recently expired eBay listing, so the page wouldn't have existed until recently.

Ok, that might be true for the discussions say over a year ago, not the recent ones; and I did say "probably"... and it applies to me too.ChoppityChop 13:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

This doesn't change much: all it produces is the article title and blurb. That's a useful pointer to a source, but without the actual article to hand, it can't be treated as a confirmation of every detail. Tearlach 11:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

"Doesn't change much"? What are you talking about? It's a published magazine article from the 1970's, in a major national magazine, describing the history, from 1963 on, of the American kings of Biffeche. The "French edits" of Wikipedia had claimed the whole American kings thing was a web "spam" and "hoax", and they apparently went to a lot of work to remove every reference to the American kings of Biffeche. The Esquire article title alone proves that they were wrong.ChoppityChop 13:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Read the Esquire Magazine article at a library, or get someone to photocopy it for you, if you want to write up the kingdom for Wikipedia. I can't figure out what further "document status" the above message is suggesting is needed. Is it suggesting that information published in a national magazine article from the 1970s is somehow less a valid documentary historical reference than what some web author has posted on the World Wide Web? If so, please post a link to the Wikipedia policy that supports this. I read the Esquire Magazine article a long time ago. I'd never heard of Biffeche. I remember that it was written primarily for its entertainment-value, not very respectfully (as the title indicates), but, from what I can remember, it had the basic kingdom factual history through about 1973 or 1974 much as the web discussions and webpages like http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/history.htm have it. My view is that the whole two years of purported "Wikipedia propriety" in this discussion page, based on the alleged spam and lack of references, is now vitiated. Maybe those who worked so rectitudinously to remove all the kingdom information in Wikipedia (or those who congratulated them) will now show equal rectitude in restoring it back. (I'd hesitate to bet on it happening, though.)ChoppityChop 13:25, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Without the article itself, we have no way of knowing from the blurb what it says about Schafer and Biffeche, and I doubt WP:RS and WP:NOR would uphold the use of a recollection of a magazine article someone read 30+ years ago. Are you in the USA? If so, you'd be better placed than me to find a copy: British libraries don't tend to keep holdings of US periodicals. You could also download the St. Louis Post-Dispatch Edward Shafer obituary. Tearlach 14:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Again, what are you talking about? I gave a reference, also called a citation, to a mainstream published source; that's all that Wikipedia requires, as far as I know. A journal reference or citation NEVER includes "the article itself" -- does it (for pre-1990 sources at least)? So why does the above say "Without the article itself..."? For documents not on the web, a reference or citation is used to look up the source at a library. Am I missing some key thing here? "[W]e have no way of knowing from the blurb what it says..." Of course, if you haven't read the article. If I say it says "martians are green" would that be a way of your "knowing...what it says" -- or what level of certification is being demanded (or, maybe, invented) here? This seems to be some new standard of documentation that we've never heard of. Whether a lawyer or a scholar, if you question the appositeness of a citation, you go look it up in the library. Of course anyone is also always free to question the veracity of any cited published source, ad infinitum, but that's not the issue here.ChoppityChop 15:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Practically speaking, someone who knows something about the Kingdom of Biffeche should write (or retrieve from past "vandal" edits) the basic history and any interesting facts, and supply the references. The Esquire Magazine reference here is merely proof that the "web spam/hoax" accusations were false, and that there really was some American Biffeche king and African kingdom (or king-like and kingdom-like entities) in operation over 30 years ago (long before the Web). The pictures of the Africans and King Ronald in http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net webpages are not themselves Wikipedia "references" but once supported by such references, unless the pictures were forged or shot in Detroit, they are compelling evidence of the active African kingdom activities recently, post-Edward. For balance, someone can add a link to the anti-royal viewpoint of the Italian priest mentioned in the Biffeche FAQ, if his views are written in any source.ChoppityChop 15:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Again, what are you talking about?

I'm saying I don't trust a 30+ year-old recollection of the contents of an article. How do I, personally, know from the blurb "All Hail the King of Biffeche! That's his Royal Majesty; By the Grace of God, Ed Schafer to you" that the article confirms the www.kingdomofbiffeche.net claims (as opposed to being, say, an ironic piece ridiculing Schafer)? As you say, finding the article is the best practical thing to do about this. There's certainly enough evidence now to add that there are claims to such an entity, but it still leaves us with zero confirmation, to WP:RS standards, of the majority of the material at kingdomofbiffeche.net. (There's probably a name for the fallacy of taking proof of one data point as proof of some wider proposition containing that data point). Tearlach 16:28, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

How do I, personally, know from the blurb "All Hail the King of Biffeche! That's his Royal Majesty; By the Grace of God, Ed Schafer to you" that the article confirms the www.kingdomofbiffeche.net claims (as opposed to being, say, an ironic piece ridiculing Schafer)?. As I remember it, it did both, to some degree.ChoppityChop 17:02, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Continued as Talk:Biffeche#Esquire article found. Tearlach 10:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

1895 Encyclopedia article

yetanother ref: year 1895: encyclopaedie reference k. "bifeche" (biffeche) in senegalfluB west afrika:

"Historisch-geographische Enzyklopädie der Welt" v. 1880-1898, artikel "BIFECHE", zb. http://www.hicleones.com/Buchstabe-B.php usw. 72.179.41.223 00:18, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone have an English translation of this 1895 German encyclopedia article on Biffeche?ChoppityChop 12:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

King seated next to Heads of State at 2003 factory opening in Senegal

Interestingly, in 2003, the current king of Biffeche (the American, "Ronald I") was seated next to the heads of state at the formal opening ceremony of the Senbus bus factory in Thies, Senegal, an enormous event attended by more than one million people (about a tenth of the entire population of Senegal). The film on the web (via http://www.diplomatie.gouv.sn/maeuase/maes_senegal_senbus01.asp ) shows him, seated next to the six African presidents (to their left, in the gray-blue suit), as the only caucasian face in the vast crowd of cheering Africans. ChoppityChop 16:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a link that works? All I can see at that page (after changing browsers - it doesn't work in Firefox) is a text news release.

Here is a web link to a rather long film of the senbus journey and factory commencement ceremonies in thies city where all the heads of state arrive together in the first bus that was ever manufactured in senegal, and then listen to speeches in a great crowd of audience lining along all the highway and the streets and in the forum. The vips and heads and the king are facing the back of president wade and the other speakers. Here:

http://www.homeviewsenegal.sn/drcontent/gallery/media/hrs.sn_tn_senbus_a_thies_170903.wmv

The only picture of the white king (ronald of biffeche) sitting by the african heads of state shows at film minutes 10:39 - 11:00, minute 20:34+ and best at minute 20:55 near the end. He also is on the earlier film greeting six arriving african prime ministers and presidents warmly at leopold sedar senghor aeroport at dakar before the ride to the senbus factory. The white king is seated immediately beside by the heads of state, but not as high a platform as they are. He wears an expensive appearing business mans or perhaps barons suit. 67.101.68.195 06:28, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

now it doesnt work again. Ask homeviewsenegal to rotate it up to top again. 67.101.68.216 01:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

BTW, I have a modest proposal. Some here seem to know so much about King Ronald's movements that one might almost suspect you know him. If you do, ask him to give an interview to a quality newspaper or magazine. The Kingdom of Biffeche is a real micronation, so he should have no reason to fear doing so, right? Wikipedia would have the required third-party source, and we'd all be happy. Tearlach 18:59, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

"...the required third-party source..." We already have the required third-party source, indeed two recognized sources: "All Hail the King of Biffeche!" Esquire, 1975, V.83 No. 3, 1975, and "Edward C. Schafer, P.R. Man, was Made Tribal King", St. Louis Post-Dispatch June 4, 1998, which I posted a second time today (under the Satellite Images section, and now a third time) and which you, Tearlach, presumably know about from our earlier discussion here. I don't have the direct Senbus film link, which I came across earlier by Googling "Biffeche" and then "Senbus" (and played with Media Player). The Senbus celebration information was in French and I can't speak French; a French speaker should be able to find it.

As for getting the Biffeche royals interviewed, their FAQ [19] says:

"Q. How can I contact the Royal family? A. Details of the Royal family are not public. ... Q. How can I get a press interview with the King? A. You cannot; the King does not grant audiences or interviews to the press. The King is concerned with helping the people of Biffeche with health, agricultural, economical and other problems; outside of Biffeche, his life is private."

So that looks like a dead end.

As far as you can can tell from reading the Biffeche Wikipedia history, the kingdom people are not aware that Wikipedia exists, and their site http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net seems not to have been updated in a long time.

"...The Kingdom of Biffeche is a real micronation..." The Lonely Planet Guide to Micronations [20] says that the Kingdom of Biffeche is not a micronation and excludes it from the book; you quoted the passage yourself, above.ChoppityChop 21:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Ronald the King of Biffeche is covered many times in Dakar journals, on the well known occasions that he visits Senegal. He is a celebrity for being a strange toubab-king who always stays in the best luxurious hotels in Dakar and Saint Louis, and compounds in Biffeche. This is extraordinary in Senegal. In addition, the Kingdom Biffeche is considered extraordinary, and notable, in Senegal, for having christian roots and a mixed christian and musulman population. There no christian kingdoms in Senegal, and no such famous places where christians and musulmans are friendly and co operate together and share the same king or other leader. This makes an interesting sensationalistic journal story every time. The other traditional kingdoms like Saloum or Yoff are entirely musulman. Note: The journal references from Dakar print with different spelling and accents to english "BIFFECHE" so try different cases.65.19.15.133 10:19, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

toubab

What's that? Senegalese for rich American twat? If you know so much about local journals, quote some sources. 86.140.110.216 03:29, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Such an article shows in this dakar newspaper from year 2002 found indexed by the word 'biffeche' with the accent, at the following address (now you have to pay a small amount to subscribe it to read it): http://fr.allafrica.com/stories/200208210669.html The article covers the american-birth king of so many muslim and christian villages of Biffeche, etc. and the future of the kingdom in the senegal society context. No coverage in Mauritania part. It is quite favorable to the kings. 67.101.68.195 06:10, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

If you lot want to talk to him so much, why don't you just e-mail him?

72.184.227.215 01:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Found a 2003 reference to King of Biffeche

J. H. Sarnecki, Out of West Africa: The Strange Case of The King of Biffeche, Phi Kappa Tau Lectures, Gender Studies Program, Lawrence University, Appleton, Wisconsin, 2003. See: [21]ChoppityChop 19:15, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. I've e-mailed her, asking her if the text of the lecture has been published anywhere... Tearlach 19:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

...but we'll have to wait because the autoresponder says she's currently on leave and will be out of email reach from May 3-May 10. Tearlach 21:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

minor claim confirmed

The Kingdom of Biffeche web site at http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/events2.htm claims the following: "Biffeche has been honored greatly by the people of La Ferté-Macé in Normandie, France. Now they have named a great and busy street after the greatest town of our Kingdom, namely: the rue Savoigne-Biffeche in La Ferté-Macé." The street address in La Ferté-Macé [22] of the Swin Golfing Center [23], is "Secrétariat: 16 rue Savoigne-Biffèche 61600 LaFerté-Macé" which confirms this, except for putting an accent over the "e". But maybe, subject to the WP:NOTE Standard, the words "great and busy" should demand painstaking further verifiable documentation compliant with the WP:RS Standard....ChoppityChop 05:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Withering sarcasm aside, for evidence purposes it may not be all that minor. It is an independent 'nonroyalist' modern, even current, French use of "Biffeche" as the place where the town of Savoigne is . They would not use a former or obsolete name of an island or former island from the 1700s that way, especially one Savoigne is not on. But they would use such a name as "Savoigne-Biffeche" if Biffeche is a current kingdom where Savoigne is. A bit of evidence.67.101.69.51 06:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

And Ferté-Macé means a place called Ferté in a kingdom called Macé? The street name does demonstrate a regional connection, but it doesn't carry any information about the precise nature of the names composing it. It could, for instance, mean an association of two equal and related places. PEPAM (not sure of the translation - Potable Water Authority or like) lists Biffeche, Savoigne Peulh and Savoigne Pionniers as small towns in the Communauté rurale de Ross Bethio. [24] Tearlach 14:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes a hyphen can mean different things. Also, if you urge the position of disbelieving every word in http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net , then the street in La Ferté-Macé could refer only to the ancient kingdom of Biffeche; some streets in France are hundreds of years old. But the minor street-name claim that I quoted still seems confirmed. The [25] reference is interesting. About half those towns are in "BIFECHE" in the 1942 topographic map cited above (in the older maps, maybe more). This list could help estimate the total population.ChoppityChop 16:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

if you urge the position of disbelieving every word

I don't urge that position: just, as I've said all along, that it needs verification and background because much of it doesn't tell the full story. It comes across as a very skilful exercise in telling the truth, but omitting context so that the reader infers something else.

Anyway, do we actually have a link to that 1942 map? The one linked in discussion [26] has the kind of detail that'd be useful, but makes no mention of any of these places. Tearlach 16:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Maps

"Anyway, do we actually have a link to that 1942 map?" No link to an actual online map, but it's listed online at [27] as:

United States. Army Map Service.

Africa, Senegal 1:125,000 ...

Washington, 1942-

Perkins Docs Map Coll G8810 s125 .U5

It's twice as large-scale as the online one at [28] and shows much more detail, but to find most of the Biffeche villages you'd need to use something like [29] centered on the Biffeche "heartland" at Bisset I and using the "Populated Places" feature below the map. You could track down all the villages mentioned in http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/events.htm that refer to these, but that looks like a tedious chore especially with variant spellings. On the river it goes from from Dios [30] up to Old Ronk (or Rong or Ronque) [31] or farther upstream, but I don't see how to figure out where the land borders are -- if there are any (African kingdoms are not under any precise-borders law and I think the Kingdom of Biffeche website says something about it).ChoppityChop 19:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Part of the difficulty is that any tribal kingdoms don't correspond to Senegal's French-style admin divisions (région / département / arrondissement / commune) that go on official maps. Tearlach 19:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

"...an island or former island ..., especially one Savoigne is not on." Actually, all the talk of "an island" is nonsense. There are channels and "marigots" all over Biffeche, part of Biffeche is not on any island, part is in Senegal, part is in Mauritania, and on the satellite maps different areas become islands in the rainy season that are connected in the dry season. Also, at least three places evidently have been/are called "Savoigne" and none of them are on the "island" where the former and current capitals (Maka and MBoubène) of Biffeche are located, because the Marigot de Deuss is between them. (The old French word "Isle" on the oldest maps has, I believe, a broader meaning than the English "island", covering a broad riverine area, for example "Île-de-France (province)", but never mind since it's all an irrelevant intentional sidetracking from the start.) What ever Biffeche is, it's not an island (or former island). See the section above titled Biffeche Not an "Island".ChoppityChop 17:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

This seems to come down to poor organisation in the starter paragraph. It looks clear that a couple of centuries ago, "Biffeche" referred to somewhere other than its current location (the Penny Cyclopedia and Pinkerton say an island 2-3 miles upstream from where St Louis is now). So the article ought to say:

Biffeche is ... what it is now.

In the 1800s the term referred to ... what it was then.

Tearlach 17:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that's right. I see no change in the extent of the Kingdom of Biffeche from the kings in the 1700's to the current, American King Ronald, at least technically. But, reading between the lines, the kingdom web page rarely mentions the villages in the far north, where the big concentrations of new-arrival agricultural laborers are. I'm guessing that most of the population of, say, the village of "Débi" [32] never heard, or only barely heard, of Ronald I or the king first selected by the Sereer elders in the far south [33]. East of the Djoudj park, in "Bethio" [34], they would presumably have a more direct relationship with "Prince Bethio" than with any remote Americans to whom he may be theoretically some kind of vassal.ChoppityChop 20:07, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Or even better, something at the level of "was described as an island". It looks as if early western explorers just trundled along the river and only described the topography as they saw it from that viewpoint. Tearlach 13:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

That might be because the main channel of the Senegal River once flowed west of the wet-season-"island" where Dios [35] (click "Satellite" for accuracy) is located, whereas it now flows east of it, and Dios was in Biffeche. This also fits with the "2 miles upstream from St. Louis" description, which the rest of Biffeche doesn't. If so, the fact that a small part of Biffeche is now in Mauritania should be added back in.ChoppityChop 11:10, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

And as I said way back, on this kind of time scale, river delta topography is highly fluid. Tearlach 11:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

The current sentence is:Biffeche or Bifeche is a region of Senegal centred on the town of Savoigne, some 20 miles north-east of its capital, Saint-Louis. The last is a bit confusing: what is Saint-Louis the capital of (the it in its}? Senegal's capital is Dakar and Biffeche's capital is Mboubene. St. Louis is capital of neither. I (almost) recommend: "Biffeche or Bifèche is a region of Senegal (along with a small area of Mauritania) centred on the town of Savoigne some 20 miles north-east of the coastal city of Saint-Louis, Senegal." However, Senegal has official "regions" and Biffeche isn't one. (This may be naively "whistling Dixie," but ... it is a traditional kingdom now (is the Post-Dispatch article, without y'all's having troubled to read other references like the cited Esquire Magazine article yet, enough to break the "references" log-jam?) and was a kingdom before (fully referenced above) so you could say just "kingdom" or "kingdom and area".ChoppityChop 13:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Oops! Dunno how I got the idea of it being the capital of Seegal, and I also forgot the ambiguity of region vs région. Tearlach 14:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

In the 19th Century, Saint-Louis was the capital of Senegal, and then French West Africa; only later was it moved to Dakar.ChoppityChop 14:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Bethio and Biffeche

The third picture on the current page at [36] is of King Ronald of Biffeche and Prince Abdoulaye of Bethio[37][38]. It doesn't say when it was taken.ChoppityChop 03:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC) Re these lofty names (now red): Once "the facts" are documented satisfactorily, they might each deserve a Wikpedia "living persons" page, though there could be privacy issues and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons limits. One wouldn't especially welcome the attentions of Ronald I's dynastic lawyers, keeping in mind the public notice of privacy outside Biffeche quoted above. (American, Scottish and Senegalese lawyers, I bet.)ChoppityChop 03:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

No-one's privacy extends to an embargo on reporting material about them on on public record. Tearlach 13:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Brave you are. Lawyers with limitless budgets can press even meritless causes for a long time.ChoppityChop 16:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:LEGAL applies if you have some relationship to King Ronald. If not, the above comments still smell of chilling effect rather than genuine concern at protecting us from legal problems. I've taken this to WP:COI. Tearlach 18:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I just suspect he's rich. Some of the remarks in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Biffeche are pretty disparaging, especially if groundless. Perhaps WP:COI will take peek while they're at it. The Kingdom of Biffeche website http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net seems ignorant of Wikipedia so far. Meanwhile I hope the "source documentation gap" has narrowed enough for your detached review. I'm running out of new reference ideas, which I enjoy discovering, and I don't want to be chilled myself.ChoppityChop 19:47, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

There are articles here about far richer and far more litigious organisations (e.g CoS). I'm not worrying.

I will say there are signs of a fine legal mind behind the Kingdom of Biffeche site. I love the way it nowhere tells untruth, but manages to convey it by implication. For instance, the caption to this picture, "His Majesty King Ronald I on Queen Elizabeth II's old Royal Yacht H.M.S. Britainnia", strongly implies some acquaintance between Ron and Brenda, while not explicitly saying so and remaining factually impeccable. You can see on this Flickr image where he's standing: the gangway from the dock at Leith where the decommissioned Britannia is permanently moored as a visitor ship for anyone to visit. And you wonder why I think this stuff needs factual verification? Tearlach 20:32, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

"...factual verification." I'm not sure you really mean "factual" -- you're saying he is factual, but you object to something like the exuded atmosphere or something else. If he'd wanted to trick us he'd have left out the word "old" and still been technically factual. Also, do you know that he doesn't know The Queen? Maybe he often drops by Balmoral (while inspecting what I think you earlier, above, called his "crappy" Scottish real estate). Snapshots on the Britannia seems like ordinary tourism.ChoppityChop 21:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure you really mean "factual"

I do. Verification that stated facts are a) true in themselves b) not misleading by implication via wording or via omission of context. Tearlach 21:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

"I love the way it nowhere tells untruth, but..." That could be going too far. Should we now accept as fact "...Biffeche was founded by the Great White Leopard at the beginning of time."? [39]ChoppityChop 22:17, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Full quote "According to our traditions, Biffeche was founded by the Great White Leopard at the beginning of time". Seems misinformation by removal of context applies here too.

True. I thought it was funnier without. My apologies.ChoppityChop 01:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Look, this discussion is getting into a pointlessly acrimonious locked-horns point-scoring situation. I can tell you're a lawyer; I've met this kind of argument style many times before, and it cuts no ice here. If you have some connection with King Ronald, it would make life far easier for all of us if you declared it and we negotiated about the article content on a straightforward basis per WP:COI guidelines. The Kingdom of Biffeche looks an interesting topic, and I'd go for including it straight away if a clear detailed confirmation of the content of www.kingdomofbiffeche.net turned up. What do you say? Tearlach 00:11, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

My profile page contains what I wish to say about me. The ancient and modern kingdoms of Biffeche both should get a fair shake and accurate, factual, snideness-free descriptions, all documented with published references. That may have to wait until someone reads the Esquire Magazine article or the "many newspaper articles" (mentioned above) about the post-1963 phase of the kingdom. Only spam should be called "spam", fraud "fraud", and a hoax "a hoax". These aren't synonyms for "odd" or "outlandish" or "politically incorrect". I'll continue to post any supporting and discrediting references I find to the Discussion page.ChoppityChop 01:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

My profile page contains what I wish to say about me

OK, if that's the way you want to play it. You had the option. I'm sure you're aware that single-purpose (or largely single-purpose) accounts always attract suspicion on Wikipedia. If you're so keen, buy the $2.95 Schafer article (I won't do it because I don't trust cross-Atlantic debit card transactions). Tearlach 01:50, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah, that deletion page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Biffeche led to another confirmation. It has a link to http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:GFUX_X3dYhEJ:www.geocities.com/corisco63132/People_Along_The_Way.html+%22Ed+Schaffer+was+a+bit+of+a+paradox%22 which was incuded as a put-down of the late Edward Schafer, and of his "kingship" of Biffeche, but it's really a confirmation of the story about him at http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net (aside from the opening sentence). The page says

"He claimed to be king of a Senegalese Christian tribe known as Biffeche, although his only trip to that part of the world consisted of having his ashes buried there. Every year he had a Ceremonial Christmas Party at his home, designated by all that night as "The Royal Palace"."

This none-too-supportive page is independent support for the truth of the story. I don't see that it's citeable, though.ChoppityChop 21:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

On-line 1840 Reference, Slave Raids in "Country of Biffeche"

The African Slave Trade and its Remedy by Thomas Fowell Buxton, Esq., John Murray Publishers, London, 1840, p. 193 [40] ChoppityChop 16:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Identified the Priest who suggested Biffeche make Edward their King in 1963

The Kingdom of Biffeche History page at http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net/history.htm claims: "The story is that in 1963 they could not settle upon a new King at the time; instead of choosing one of their own people they asked their priest, Father VAST, for guidance. He advised them to choose the person who had helped them the most during their plight. That person was one Edward Charles Schafer." That "Father VAST" would be the "Père Jean Vast" who was ministering at Saint-Louis, Senegal in 1963. "...au Sénégal en 1949, vicaire à la paroisse cathédrale de Saint-Louis, il fut aussi actif dans le mouvement pour la Jeunesse Ouvrière Chrétienne (JOC). Curé de la cathédrale Saint-Louis en 1964, vicaire général du diocèse de Saint-Louis en 1968. Vers 1999, il se retire à l’abbaye de Langonnet (Bretagne). Il meurt à Bréhan, le samedi 3 septembre 2005, dans sa 85ème année. Il a publié entre autres. "Saint-Louis, ville au mille visages" en 1989." Source: [41] -- he was also the foremost promoter of African cinema in Senegal. I recall that his role was also covered in "All Hail the King of Biffeche", Esquire Magazine, March 1975. Together these references are a major piece of the source-documentation puzzle in place.ChoppityChop 17:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Esquire article found

The Esquire article is here at the San Jose State library. Vol 83, March, 1975, page 80, All Hail the King of Biffeche.

It starts with the first paragraph:

In 1964, when Ed Schafer of St. Louis, Missouri was named king of a tiny African tribe caled Biffeche, there was a minor flurry of publicity. Since then, the story has been forgotten. But for the past ten years, Schafer has been acting as divine-right monarch over a group of Africans he has never seen. He communicates with them by mail and telephone, through a missionary priest in Senegal who acts as interpreter. When he goes to mass in the St. Louis Cathedral (an official outing requiring flags on the fenders of his Cadillac and the sevices of his part-time chauffeur), the cardinal stops the recessional to acknowledge his presence. He has been asked to ride with the mayor in big parades, and was invited to the governor's inauguration. For a while, the St. Luois postmaster set aside a celebrity mailbox so that lettersa addressed to "The King, St. Louis, Missouri" could be delivered to him. Schafer maintains that the local Jesuits and Benedictines squabble over who gets to be royal chaplain (at present there is one of each). He says he enjoys the sanction of the U*.S. State Department and the Vatican. He signs official documents with his official title: His Royal Majesty, Edward I, By the Grace of God, King of Biffeche."

For copyright concern, I'll summarize the rest:

It began as a charity project. Henrietta Bulus who had lived in Senegal started a committeee to help the Biffeche tribe having a hard time on the Senegal River. Edward Schafer headed "Committeee for Biffeche. "Biffeche" is Ouloff language. Originally 55 people, growing to 150. Original area loyal to Edward was only 3 square miles. People angry that promises not kept after resettlement. Fathere Jean Vast suggested new king should be one who "helped them most". Edward. He was proclaimed king. Sent him notice "Riz de notre Recolte. En hommage. Merci a Sa Majeste Le Roi de Biffeche Edouard." with rice grains, fetal animal skin, and gourds.

Schafer got approval from G. Mennen Soapy Williams at State dept. Also, Embassy of Senegal. Washington Daily News, Aug 22, 1964, reported White House didn't invite Edward.

Several Aristocrats. Visiting African dignitaries. Offended the Ethiopean. ... Set up Anglo german system of aristcrats. Sent money, crop advice, and drainage experts to help the natives etc.

Etc.

Generally, except for a few date discrepancies, etc., it confims the webpage claims. The ending is a bit condescending in tone.130.65.109.100 04:55, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Note that there is no mention of Ronald, just two other potential Heirs. Also no mention of other religions, native kings, geograhical extent, etc. It's about the man130.65.109.100 04:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Excellent! This is all that was required to get the article moving. Tearlach 10:58, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

What a coincidence, I just acquired a scan of the 1975 Esquire article as well. I can share a copy if others email me. The article is much as Choppity remembered, a mostly serious article that does seem to take delight in subtly mocking Ed Schafer.

According to the article, it was not a charity project, but an experiment organized by the Senegal government and the Catholic Church. The 55 people were relocated to the delta to determine whether the land could be adapted for agricultural use. After failing to receive support from Senegal, the the group voted to secede; the article merely says that "Senegal was unconcerned." The date of the project was not given, but it is implied that it is not long before 1964, when Schafer was named king. There is a quotation from Schafer (in 1975 or shortly before, presumably), that says that the group eventually expanded their territory from 100 acres to 3 square miles, and that the population had grown to 150.

130 is quite right, relative to the kingdom's web site, the article conspicuously does not mention any native kings. The article also does not mention from where the 55 settlers originated, and is ambiguous about whether Biffeche ("new tribe" in Ouloff) was used by the tribe before the relocation. ×Meegs 18:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

"According to the article, it was not a charity project"... au contraire! The 2d par. starts: "It all began as a charity project."130.65.109.100 04:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Support spread more among the neighbors to Muslims afterwards. Cd be thety liked to get aid and advice. The article tells very little about who the Biffeche people are, or who their rulers were before Edward I. That is only in the older French and Dutch references, and the http:www.kindomofbiffeche.net/history source. Esquire does not CONTRADICT anything in the web version, except Edward appointed in 1964 instead of 1963. It confirms many little details such as the "so important he lives in America" and similar facts. So far there is nothing in the article to cast doubt on the official version.130.65.109.100 03:57, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

"Esquire does not CONTRADICT anything in the web version, except Edward appointed in 1964 instead of 1963." Well, the Associated Press in 1965 reported the specific date that Edward had become king of Biffeche, and it had been in 1963, not 1964: "ST. LOUIS, Mo. (AP) ... The king is Edward C. Schafer, 42, ... He was elected king, with hereditary privileges, Jan. 20, 1963. Schafer's path to the throne began in 1962 when he became chairman of a St. Louis committee to help the tribe. ..." in, e.g., the Fond Du Lac Commonwealth Reporter Saturday, October 02, 1965. (A scanned excerpt of the relevant passage is presently online at: newspaperarchive.com) The same Associated Press story was carried by many newspapers. Here again a verifiable published source indepedently supports the accuracy of the kingdom web page: "... in 1963 they could not settle upon a new King at the time; instead of choosing one of their own people they asked their priest, Father VAST, for guidance. He advised them to choose the person who had helped them the most during their plight. That person was one Edward Charles Schafer." [42] ChoppityChop 05:19, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

The group was in Biffeche and had moved south and then moved back north. The French source says the "DJEUSS" family often ruled the area as kings, and the Djeuss were originally Sereer tribal people. The web says the relocated people returned to "Biffeche-Ville" which is known to be the HQ of the Biffeche kings at EMBoubene (or EMBoulane). The antique maps indicate it too. Which is at the mouth of "Marigot de Djeuss" which is called in the second old map "Petite Riviere de Gios ou du Petit Brak". Riviere means river, and "Gios" is surely "Djeuss". It says they are Sereer but that Biffeche has other ethnic groups under the kings. Obviously whether "Biffeche" means new tribe or not, it was used for 100s of years at least; look at the old cited French maps of the Biffeche kingdom of the "petit brak".130.65.109.100 04:16, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

"It all began as a charity project" is referring to Schafer's involvement. The article does not say that Henrietta Balus initiated the delta agriculture experiment, but merely that she brought news of it back to the U.S. and initiated a charity fund with the help of Schafer.

The article's lack of info on the people Biffeche is disappointing, and in my summary above, I was specifically trying to not fill in its gaps and ambiguities using the kingdom's web site. You are correct that the article does not contradict the web site, but it is still important as we move forward that we not use the site as the sole source for any fact. ×Meegs 05:12, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

If we combine the several big and little fact confirmations from all different sources put in this discussion, looks like the http://www.kingdomofbiffeche.net pages is a reliable source for simple pure facts, strictly interpreted. But as Tearlach writes above, the facts part is all right, but need to be careful about buying into all the "almost-implied conclusions" that seem to be lurking behind or along with the facts. See also: http://tekrur-ucad.refer.sn/IMG/pdf/JOURHIST1729-1731global.pdf Obviously-provably- this kingdom existed until recently with native African kings of Sereer tribe origin and they returned and were poverty-stricken and picked these Americans to reign (and maybe shower money?) over them. That is their business. It looks like the king Ronald has massive support (prob. grown from hundreds in early 1970s to thousands now) in the south part but as previously mentioned there is little evidence on here that the north part by the Djoudj Bird Park is really behind this king (but the north part is included in all the antique French maps of the kingdom). We don't doubt what is said, but we look very carefully at what is un-said.130.65.109.100 20:54, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

A Ref but can't webcite it

There is separate coverage of the current "KingdomOfBiffeche" in several "government" databases that are not allowed to be web-linked. The English-comments fields for Biffeche (kingdom), Ronald and Edward (kings) include short versions of the Biffeche story. There are semantic web "links" or "triples" that state various formal relationships. For example "KingdomOfBiffeche" is linked to "(GovernmentFn Senegal)" and "(GovernmentFn Mauritania)". There other African kingdoms in the area as well, and a little historic background. This was used as an amusing example of the total thoroughness of the geographical knowledge in these government-funded knowledge bases, at a conference. From this it appears that US, UK EU and other governments cd be well aware and in contact currently with Biffeche.130.65.109.100 21:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Mmmmmm, seems like one bit of "government data" s1ipped out of bounds into the pub1ic1y-goog1ab1e webspace after a11. Today, goog1e picks up the bit

"$Id: ExportOwl.java,v 1.11 2004/06/15 20:27:31 reed Exp ... ... titles in the systems of nobility of Europe, or #$Biffeche-KingdomOf. ...... of the kingdom of Biffeche in northern Senegal (#$Biffeche-KingdomOf), ..." from http://semweb.mcdonaldbradley.com/ even though that site, and that page, are de1eted and hang up a browser. Mightn't be there tomorrow. The "reed Exp" 1ooks dead cryptic, but McDonald Brad1ey, Inc. (see http://www.mcdonaldbradley.com/) obvious1y is one of these private contractors working for American inte11igence and defence agencies. Something ca11ed "P1one" [43] "security leve1s" appears in fo11ow-up goog1es/c1icks. So ... right, these agencies and probab1y MI-x too must have scads of detai1ed info on "Bifeche-KingdomOf" in their databases. Combine that with the friendship of the "King"'s brother "Prince" Wa1ter Reisinger to the Bush fami1y and the repub1ican senator Bond of Misouri (see the pics wearing a highly UN-roya1 ghast1y multicoloured bow tie with them at a toff party http://www.newyorksocialdiary.com/partypictures/2003/9.30.03/partypictures9.30.03.php ) to whatever "King" Rona1d I might have with his neighbour QE II, and this 1ittle "kingdom" begins to appear very we11-"connected" indeed.

Simpler explanation: someone from McDonald Bradley was playing with the OpenCyc open source semantic web database (which can be accessed here. OpenCyc is just an inference engine - zero checking of the source data it feeds on, so zero reliability here. The MO connection is well-known: most of the Biffeche-related US names Google down to mugshots at St Louis society junkets. 82.25.239.101 11:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Elite, old-money, multi-millionaires, to look at them. The Kingdom from 1963 impresses as being a peculiar way of these people to tranfer their charitable moneys toward local african projects like rice-milling machines and like irrigation-ditches in the Biffeche kingdom delta agricultural area, picking up some impressive noble awards along the way and enjoying a "status inconnu" known only among their own high-society group and a few far-distant autochthone villagers. There is a report on these old-money multimillionaires families of St. Louis (in America) entitled "The Big Cinch" and (un-surprise) that it covers many noble families of the Biffeche kingdom. 70.187.179.10 22:57, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Several Published Newspaper Sources in 1960's and 70's

In the Daily Messenger, Friday, October 16, 1964, is the following story: "U.S. Citizen has dual role as King Edward of Biffeche" A thumbnail image is currently at [44] Also "MONARCH IN ST. LOUIS RULES BY MAIL" November 14, 1964 [45], and "Mail-Order Monarch" by Robert Goddard, Christian Science Monitor, Boston, Mass., Nov 17, 1964: "King Edward I of Biffeche in western Africa has never seen any of his subjects and can't even speak their language. Nor does King Edward have a crown, but he's a bona fide monarch regardless."[46]

Both UPI and the Associated Press reported on the Biffeche story in 1964 and 1965, respectively. They covered the selection of the American, Edward Schafer, as King Edward I by the Biffeche people.

United Press International (UPI) distributed worldwide a news story on Biffeche in December, 1964:

"ST. LOUIS (UPI) Edward C. Schafer is an American citizen and King Edward I of Biffeche, ruler of an African tribe. Schafer drives an automobile with Missouri license tags on the back and a special 'Kingdom of BIFFECHE No. 1' license tag on the front of his car. Schafer is public relations director for the St. Louis Youth Project at the Missouri State Employment Service. He also directs public service radio and television programs in town. Interview: Brought Help On one of his radio programs... Schafer even went to Washington on behalf of Biffeche to confer with diplomats from Senegal. He complained of the"very High tariff on exports"...

This story was published all over, e.g. in the Auburn Citizen-Advertser, Auburn, New York, Dec 8, 1965, with various locally-supplied headlines. One was "Mail-Order Ruler of African Nation"; see http://www.newspaperarchive.com/LandingPage.aspx?type=glpnews&search=biffeche&img=\\na0032\6793577\50282198.html

The Associated Press (AP) also assigned reporters in 1965 to cover the Biffeche story:

"55 Africans Are Loyal To U.S. 'King'" ST. LOUIS, Mo. (AP) King Edward I of the African tribe of Biffeche in the Republic of Senegal has never seen his country or his people -- all 55 of them. The king is Edward C. Schafer, 42, a St. Louis public relations consultant. He was elected king, with hereditary privileges, on January 20, 1963. Schafer's path to the throne began in 1962 when he became chairman of a St. Louis committee to help the tribe. It started when a native of Saint-Louis, Senegal, told several American friends the Biffeche needed aid. The tribe..."

Another story in the Charlston Daily Mail, front page, Oct 2, 1965: MISSOURIAN KING OF AFRICAN TRIBE. Edward C. Schafer, a St. Louis public relations man, is the elected king of the African tribe of Biffeche. With the flag of the Biffeche in the background, Schafer sits with wood carvings produced by his tribe. He sells the carvings in the United States and sends the money to Africa for use..." There is a large picture of King Edward exhibiting Biffeche wood-carvings. See [47].

Eleven years later the world press (UPI) found it newsworthy to record that he did not have a camel.

"Ruler Needs A Camel To Visit Subjects", News Journal, Monday, March 08, 1976 "ST. LOUIS (UPI) Edward the First, King of BIFFECHE, would like to visit his loyal subjects, but first the tiny African nation must find a camel. Native ritual requires that the king make a royal entrance on camelback. but there are no camels in BIFFECHE. "I'd have to notify them several months in advance to give them time to import a the king said. "Africans are very protocol-minded." King Edward, who is known as Ed Schafer at the public relations firm where he w..."

It includes photograph of King Edward I sitting in a chair. A thumbnail image is currently on the web at [48] or see "Wanted: One Camel by the King of Biffeche" [49]

Note this this is independent UPI press confirmation of the "issue" of the Biffeche king's riding a camel, and the present king Ronald I's apparent deficit in not riding one, bemoaned in [50] as:

"The ruler Maysamaramu had a great horse.

He rode all around on his horse.

But for a king, Maysamaramu said a camel is best.

In Biffeche the camels carry the kings.

We used to get the royal camels from the Tukolor.

Our new king from America should ride the camel.

Why has King Ronald not ridden a camel?

King Ronald sometimes rides an elephant in America.

Are the Tukolors' camels not big enough for Ronald?

Are the Tukolors' camels not big enough for our king?"

I found all these references and several others today using Google News Archive search with the keyword "Biffeche". Apparently King Edward did not have his successor King Ronald's policy of refusing all interviews with the press. For one thing, Edward appeared as king of Biffeche on the TV quiz show "To Tell the Truth".ChoppityChop 20:23, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

For one thing, Edward appeared as king of Biffeche on the TV quiz show "To Tell the Truth".

The old game show, To Tell The Truth, has celebrity contestants try to choose the real person from a group of three people. One is real and the other two are convincing bluffers or impostors. Both bluffers pretending to be the king of Biffeche in Africa look like real Africans. One of the bluffers turns out to be a black bodybuilding champion (a former Mr. Olympia), Sergio Oliva, huge, majestic and powerfully muscled. The real King Edward of Biffeche (Edward C. Schafer, a modest white businessman in glasses with a droopy nasal American accent) looks and talks like the least likely African king you could possibly imagine. 70.112.5.251 (talk) 10:15, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Email address

Just a note, I removed the email address from this talk page to prevent abuse. Of course, it is still in the page's history, if you need it for some reason. Best, Smmurphy^(Talk) 05:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

18th Century Engraving of the Petit Brak, or Little King, of Biffeche, online

The third-to-last of the royal costume engravings currently listed online for sale by Grosvenor Prints of London, at http://www.grosvenorprints.com/duflos.htm#duflpeti , Lot No. 224, shows a picture of the "Petit Brak" (or "Little King" of Biffeche, then resident at Maka on the Senegal River), in his royal garb. This portrait is a page taken from the French book:

Deuxieme Recueil des Portraits des Homes et des Femmes Illustres de Toutes les Nations Connues, Présentés Sous le Costume de leurs Dignités...

A Paris, Chez Duflos le jeune, rue Saint Victor, 1787. Gravés par le Sieur Duflos le jeune.

Portraits and costume plates, in strong contemporary colour, with gold leaf line surround. ['A.D.P.R.' (Avec Privilege Du Roi) inscribed lower right].

The Petit Brak is somewhat misleadingly labeled in the catalogue entry (and on the engraving itself) as being the "Roy de Kayor" (King of Cayor): 224. Senegal Petit Brak, Roi de Kayor. The costume portrait of the real king of Cayor, the Damel of Cayor, appears below it as Lot No. 226, Lartifal Saukabe. Damel et Roy de Kayor. (Click on the web picture to see a bigger rendering of him.)

The apparent reason is that in mid-18th Century the Petit Brak, although his capital was at Maka in his kingdom of Biffeche, also ruled over a territory some distance away to the south called Gangeul in the area of Bieurt, which was (and still is) southeast of Saint Louis on the mainland of Senegal (i.e., closer to Cayor), not in Biffeche, which is northeast of Saint Louis. This latter territory of Gangeul (as opposed to Biffeche) he held as a kind of feudal vassal of the Damel of Cayor. Although he A. was a king (in Biffeche), B. was called "Petit Brak," and C. governed at Gangeul in Bieurt as a local seigneur subordinate to the Damel of Cayor, he was not the King of Cayor.

Most of this information comes from Footnote 29 of Journal Historique et Suitte du Journal Historique (1729-1731) Documents inédits, présenté et publiés par Charles Becker et Victor Martin, Publié dans le Bulletin de l’Institut Fondamental d’Afrique Noire Tome 39, Série B, n° 2, avril 1977, p. 223-289 [51], the antique map [52] cited on the Biffeche page, and the 1728 map at [53]. The footnote says: (29) Gangueul et Bieurt sont situés au sud-est de St-Louis, sur la terre ferme et appartiennent au Petit Brak. Celui-ci est un dignitaire important du Waalo et réside habituellement au village de Maka (25 km environ au NNE de St-Louis,...)... So Maka, Biffeche, the home the Petit Brak, was not in Gangeul at all, and the Petit Brak was feudatory to the Damel of Cayor with respect to his Gangeul territory, ibid, without reference to the Kingdom of Biffeche. Apparently, Biffeche was for long periods associated with the Waalo kingdom (as Waalo's protectorate) and at many times with Bethio (probably as Bethio's superior -- see the maps cited above). Bieurt is inscribed at the far lower right of the maps, SW of Saint Louis. (I read that Saint Louis itself was called Ile de Bieurt starting around 1638.)

This old French collection emphasizes royal costumes rather than the people wearing them. That may account for the fact that the 18th Century Petit Brak looks rather caucasian, even nordic, for an African king. (That's something we're used to here...) Something else:

In Biffeche we wear the cap of blue and white.

Blue and white makes us love our kings.

And the caps keep our heads warm.

When our old men sit and talk

They wear the caps of Biffeche in Blue and White.[54].

In the 18th Century picture, the colors of the Petit Brak's cap and robe are blue and white. ChoppityChop 21:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

A Contradiction

Searching Google News Archive with "Waalo", I just found: "A Dictionary of African Mythology Date: 2000 Author: Harold Scheub Oxford University Press Njaajaan Njaay Lives in a River (Wolof/Senegal) Njaajaan Njaay was the mythic founder of the Waalo kingdom.:"

After the great flood, the children of Noah multiplied, and some settled in the area that would become the great empire of Ghana. Among them was Mbaarik Bo, who was converted to Islam by Bubakar Umar. He then followed Bubakar Umar, who moved to the west. Bubakar Umar was the father of Njaajaan Njaay, the first ruler of the Waalo empire. Bubakar, continuing his work of converting people to Islam, now lived among the Serer, and was wounded by Hamar, the leader of the Serer."[55] (emphasis added)

Saga:

"Later, when No [Noah] got drunk, he cursed his son Aam....

Then later came Misrae who was the uncle of the Fula and all the Sereer and the Waalo-Waalo and the Tukolor...

The Sereer used to be masters of Biffeche many centuries ago.

...A crazy man was hiding in the water watching her.

You know who he was.

He was Njaajaan the Waalo-Waalo who was crazy in the river.

Grandson of Umar.

Someday he would be king of all Jolof when it still included Waalo."[56] (emphasis added)

So, it's "Bubakar Umar was the father of Njaajaan Njaay, the first ruler of the Waalo empire." versus "Njaajaan... grandson of Umar". ChoppityChop 07:11, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

So, when will the missing Kingdom history be put in the main article properly, and the dumb references removed?

So, when will the missing Kingdom history be put in the main article properly, and the dumb references removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.241.126.201 (talk) 00:34, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Someone should collect all the references in this discussion page and make a fully referenced main article about the kingdom including the modern kings and delete the general-Senegal-refs padding.24.153.221.241 (talk) 21:48, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Documentation of the modern African Kingdom of Biffeche (with white American kings!) from the year 1975

The University of Missouri-St. Louis has a historical research collection called the St. Louis Mercantile Library. http://www.umsl.edu/mercantile/ It has an archive collection of the St. Louis Globe-Democrat going back over a hundred years. This collection has some detailed articles about Biffeche. One article "What Ever Happened to King Edward I of Biffeche?" by Walter E. Orthwein, Staff Writer, St. Louis Globe-Democrat, April 12-13, 1975, confirms some of the main issues questioned in the Wikipedia discussions.

King Edward I of Biffeche---otherwise Edward C. Schafer, St. Louis public relations counselor who in 1964 ascended the throne of a tiny, new West African rebel state by popular vote.

The 52-year-old sovereign reigns by grace of the U. S. State Department without forfeiting his American citizenship. An absentee ruler, he governs by remote control from his home in west St. Louis County.

The self styled mail-order monarch takes his duties with the utmost seriousness. But he has never visited his subjects...

"They want me to come," Schafer explains. "but I figure the cost of the trip could be put to better uses, such as buying badly needed tractors and farm machinery for them."...

The article also says a King of Biffeche was expected to travel by camelback after deplaning but Edward never traveled there, the American connection started in 1963 with a visit by "Mrs. Henrietta Bulus of St. Louis," the Senegal government had "welshed on its promise" to Biffeche of farm equipment, and Edward's first subjects were of the tribe Sereer (or Sierre) who were moved there by the Senegal government and selected him as their king. "The wisdom of the choice was demonstrated by the new king's first official act---he went to Washington to apply for foreign aid." There are numerous other facts.

This is clear. By now, it seems like everything about the modern Biffeche kingdom and its white American kings has been confirmed by independent published documentation authority fulfilling the Wikipedia standard.24.153.221.241 (talk) 21:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

P.S. The article also has a picture with caption "King Edward I" and it looks like a very normal pleasant white businessman in a light jacket and dark tie wearing black-rim glasses and his short black hair is combed straight back.24.153.221.241 (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Info on King Edward of Biffeche, w Refs:

http://www.thebestlinks.com/Edward_I_of_Biffeche.html via Google —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.227.152.141 (talk) 17:22, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Article in Today's NY Times

New York Times today (Jan 26, 2009, p. A8) has an agricultural article about the north part of Biffeche at the town of Ronkh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.93.216.22 (talk) 19:16, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Suspicious Claimants

The International Commission on Nobility and Royalty - ICNR has included His Majesty, King Ronald I., King of Biffeche on their list of suspicious claimants. http://www.nobility-royalty.com/id64.htm Beside the International Commission of Orders of Chivalry - ICOC, the ICNR is the only international non-governmental association whose opinion is requested and respected by government institutions and Royal Houses. About the Sultan (talk) 13:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

1995 Reference Confirms King Edward of Biffeche (previous American king) Story

This short reference currently (mid-2010) shows up on Google Books using search word "Biffeche" It is a survey of various American radio talk shows at the time, and it mentions the radio show of King Edward of Biffeche, in St. Louis, Missouri, U.S.A., in the early 1990's, including his kingship of Biffeche. This seems to be a completely independent historical confirmation, though the content is slight:

"A series of events beginning with a donated tractor gave him the official title of king of the tiny nation of Biffeche but he prefers holding court with his listeners. As producer of the issue-oriented program "Metro Report", many of the topics discussed are also aired in his Monday evening Party Line segments." Page 197 of Talk shows and hosts on radio: a directory including show titles and formats, biographical information on hosts, and topic/subject index, Anne M. Brewer, Whitefoord Press, 1995, 295 pages.

Apparently King Edward I of Biffeche (Edward Schafer) was the host of several radio shows in America. 24.173.73.210 (talk) 21:03, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Published References for King Edward of Biffeche story in 1963-1987

There are currently-on-line 1976 and 1987 newspaper stories about the previous American king of Biffeche:

1. "African King Rules from St. Louis Home" in The Port Arthur News, Port Arthur, Texas,Page 31, March 10, 1976: http://www.newspapers.com/newspage/30141900/

2."Edward Schafer: African King savors royal life in west county" West Citizen Journal (St. Louis. Mo.), July 29, 1987: http://www.tjresler.com/african-king.html

Edward I of Biffeche (deceased) probably deserves his own Wikipedia article, since this kingship was noteworthy and unusual.

24.55.4.38 (talk) 02:44, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Biffeche. 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/20140517151845/http://www10.gencat.net/pres_casa_llengues/AppJava/frontend/llengues_detall.jsp?id=620&idioma=9 to http://www10.gencat.net/pres_casa_llengues/AppJava/frontend/llengues_detall.jsp?id=620&idioma=9
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060212134527/http://www.au-senegal.com/decouvrir_en/cart_stlouis.htm to http://www.au-senegal.com/decouvrir_en/cart_stlouis.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://senegalmaur.ifrance.com/st-louis-com-traite.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051122063200/http://www.au-senegal.com/decouvrir_en/cart_1753.htm to http://www.au-senegal.com/decouvrir_en/cart_1753.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060908121055/http://tekrur-ucad.refer.sn/IMG/pdf/JOURHIST1729-1731global.pdf to http://tekrur-ucad.refer.sn/IMG/pdf/JOURHIST1729-1731global.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060322204643/http://portail.atilf.fr/cgi-bin/getobject_?p.112%3A14.%2Fvar%2Fartfla%2Fencyclopedie%2Ftextdata%2FIMAGE%2F to http://portail.atilf.fr/cgi-bin/getobject_?p.112%3A14.%2Fvar%2Fartfla%2Fencyclopedie%2Ftextdata%2FIMAGE%2F
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051228152354/http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-27937-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html to http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-27937-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051125163711/http://www.ausenegal.com/decouvrir_en/parc_djoudj.htm to http://www.ausenegal.com/decouvrir_en/parc_djoudj.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051012141557/http://crdp.ac-martinique.fr/ressources/caraibe/histoiregeo/didactique/ali_shandora/resultats_recherche.htm to http://crdp.ac-martinique.fr/ressources/caraibe/histoiregeo/didactique/ali_shandora/resultats_recherche.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)