User talk:Saqiwa

Saqiwa, you are invited to the Teahouse

Hi Saqiwa! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! TheOriginalSoni (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 20:41, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Saqiwa. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes sorry ignore speedy deletionSaqiwa (talk) 11:26, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No speedy

Regarding these edits, why on earth did you place your apologies in a {{db-g7}} tag? This had the effect of sending this page to CAT:CSD which is not what you wanted. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:41, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

Hello, I'm DrKay. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Nakorotubu District, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 16:04, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. DrKay (talk) 17:10, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding unsourced content. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. DrKay (talk) 16:27, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Lake Tanganyika. DrKay (talk) 15:17, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ DrKay Can you please stop being inconsistent with your editing at Lake Tanganyika, then why did you remove the citation from Cornell University about Lutunasobasoba.I cannot understand why you are removing my articles willy nilly with the source and then with the same breath, you are accusing me of citing unsourced materials, when I have made an attempt to do so. Also stop threatening to block me when I have been making all the effort to follow the rules. I am going to have this discussed at the Teahouse. Saqiwa (talk) 11:01, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ ,

It is happening again on my contributions to Lake Tanganyika, can you please look at how DrKay continues to be inconsistent and selective with his editing. Perhaps, the intention is more than the rules of wikipedia but about suppressing the input contents to the article. Furthemore, he is threatening to block me when I have been making an effort to apply the rules, please refer to the editing history of Lake Tanganyika.Saqiwa (talk) 11:16, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whisperback

Hello. You have a new message at Kudpung's talk page. 17:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Saqiwa! You created a thread called Editors are editing and removing my articles and demanding quotations of sources when they are already quoted. at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New message from CASSIOPEIA

Hello, Saqiwa. You have new messages at WP:TH.
Message added 16:44, 14 September 2019 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CASSIOPEIA^(talk) 16:44, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Saqiwa! Thank you for your contributions. I am KillerChihuahua and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Killer Chihuahua 18:31, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know you're not really all that new, but you seem to be a bit conflurried about things here - please know you are welcome, and try to relax and have fun here! Killer Chihuahua 18:32, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice KillerChihuahua.Saqiwa (talk) 13:19, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Saqiwa! You created a thread called Follow-up to Editors are editing and removing my articles and demanding quotations of sources when they are already quoted. at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:00, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. — Marchjuly (talk) 12:48, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please don’t mark your edits as “minor edits” unless they’re truly minor as explained in WP:MINOR. If you’re not sure whether your edit is minor, then you probably shouldn’t mark it as such. Almost all of your recent edits to the article wouldn’t be consider minor. —- Marchjuly (talk) 12:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It seems as if you’re marking all of your edits as minor. Perhaps you’re doing this unintentionally, but you need to figure out why. Make sure the box “This is a minor edit” is not checked before you click “Publish changes”. — Marchjuly (talk) 13:03, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Got you thanks, indeed it was unintentional, will refrain from marking "minor edits" next time. Saqiwa (talk) 13:16, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Saqiwa, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Adi Laufitu Malani have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 💵Money💵emoji💵^💸 13:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks 💵Money💵emoji💵 for sharing and guiding me on the wikipedia rules, much appreciated. What I am concerned about is how other wikipedia editors are selective and inconsistent in applying the wikipedia rules to my articles. For the last 4 years, all my articles were not considered important, however recently there seems to have been a sudden increase to the scrutiny of my contributions, specifically when certain information/documents that were considered confidential and question certain status quo have been shared. I have now reached a stage of keeping a personal copy of my contributions in order to compare that with the reasons that an editor will justify to delete or amend my articles to prove that there are ulterior motives of amending my articles. Before, wikipedia editors would be very friendly and encouraging by guiding and amending my articles whereas, now, the only thing that I am receiving are threats of being blocked from wikipedia, which makes my conspiracy thoery more relevant. I hope that the other editors were like you. Saqiwa (talk) 10:34, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not publish original research. All content must be explicitly cited from a reliable, secondary or tertiary, source. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources#Primary, secondary, and tertiary sources and Wikipedia:No original research#Synthesis of published material. DrKay (talk) 16:24, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some advice

Hi Saqiwa. I've seen you posting comments about other editors editing "your articles", but you need to understand that none of the articles that we as editors create or edit are "our articles" as explained in Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Right above the "Publish changes" button in the editing window of each and every page is a statement which reads as follows: By publishing changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license. So, every time you click the "Publish changes" button, you basically giving any claim of ownership over the relevant edit you are making. This means that anyone can use the content you add to an article and build upon it to further improve the article or they can remove it altogether if they feel it doesn't belong for some relevant policy or guideline; so, if you're having disagreements over article content with another editor, you should try to resolve them per Wikipedia:Dispute resolution process by discussing things with the other editor on the relevant article's talk page.

I strongly advise you to stop referring to articles as "my articles" because it can easily cause others to mistakenly assume that you're claiming some kind of ownership right over something that you can never possibly own, even if you probably don't mean it taken that way. Just for reference in case you didn't know already, we as editors don't even "own" pages within the user namespace per WP:UP#OWN. I can say something like "my user talk page", but it's not really my page as in I "own" the page. I'm only in a sense borrowing it from Wikipedia and for the most part Wikipedia and other editors will leave me be as long as I don't use "my" user pages to violate some Wikipedia policy or guideline. Articles are the same way in that we can edit them as long as we do so in accordance with relevant policies and guidelines. So, if we make an edit that someone else reverts, then we should try to understand why and figure out whether there's anything we can do better; we shouldn't really worry about WP:OTHERCONTENT.

You do realize that DrKay is a Wikipedia administrator which means there's a good chance that the warnings being issued to you are done for a valid reason. If an administrator really felt you were causing some serious problems, they could block your account with any warning at all. Have you tried discussing the reasons you're receiving these warnings with DrKay on their user talk page or have you tried discussing your disagreements over article content and sourcing with them on relevant article talk pages? It's OK for us as editors to make mistakes when we make them in good faith. Administrators will likely give us the benefit of the doubt when we do and maybe issue us a warning to let us know to be careful. However, if we keep making the same mistakes over and over again, eventually the warnings will stop and our accounts will be blocked. If you keep believing that people are warning you because there's some kind of conspiracy against you, then you're going to have a hard time convincing others that you're really editing for the benefit of Wikipedia and not for the benefit of something else. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of Decency, Inconsistent and Selective Editing

Well DrKay maybe a Wikipedia administrator but what I am trying to raise here is the lack of decency, inconsistent, selective editing and the replacement of wrong reports and information. This can be proven by the Nakorotubu et al. articles which contained 4 years of contribution with credible sources which were suddenly removed by DrKay with no warning at all. The Nakorotubu article was replaced by just 2 -3 lines (with wrong names of some Nakorotubu sub-districts including the omission of Kavula sub district). On the other hand, DrKay has been removing credible source pdf documents citing a lack of credible source, where is the consistency? This sudden increase in scrutiny happened lately in the last few months when confidential information about Fiji's history were shared as contents to Nakorotubu, Monarchy of Fiji, Lake Tanganyika, Roko Tui Bau, Malani and Vunivalu of Bau in wikipedia. I do not claim to own these artiles but as a wikipedia contributor, I thought that the information and contents of wikipedia should be credible and communicated well for the sake of readers and not deleted to pieces through 'rules reasoning' and keeping readers less informative. I am sure that one of the reasons and objectives of the founders of wikipedia in opening up the editing of articles was to encourage information sharing. Wikipedia is a renowned online encyclopedia and there is a need to have a balance between following wikipedia rules and credible informative contents in order to maintain the foresight of the founders of wikipedia. I am not desperate or do not need to convince the administrator or anyone to stay on and not blocked from wikipedia but my point is that decency, honesty, courtesy, consistency and human touch should be maintained when a rule has been broken through guidance of comradeship and friendliness instead of otherwise. Saqiwa (talk) 11:30, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The list of sub-districts is sourced to the Fijian government[1]. There was no source for the other list. This is just one example of the many unsourced, or poorly sourced, statements that have been improved or removed by my edits. DrKay (talk) 16:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to edit history of Nakorotubu and the other mentioned articles above on inconsistencies, selective editing and lack of decency.Saqiwa (talk) 02:44, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of Fijians - Chiefs

The late Ratu Meli Bolobolo, Tui Navitilevu, a High Chief from Ra and descendant of Degei was a SVT politician and stood at the 1999 Fiji general election and was thrashed by the Independent candidate, George Shiu Raj. I have replaced him with the late Ratu Kuliniyasi Roko Malani who was not a politician.Saqiwa (talk) 03:23, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Degei

Again, there is miscommunication here with lack of credible citations, Degei was not the father of Rokola. Rokola was a mataisau or from the carpenter clan. Degei was the second eldest brother of Lutunasobasoba. Similar to the miscommunication and inconsistencies with the UNICEF report and the total deletion of the previous Nakorotubu article, there are incorrect contents for Degei. Interestingly, there seems to be a promotional write up for Degei and none for Lutunasobasoba. Even the credible reference citations for Lutunasobasoba that were included to the Lake Tanganyika article were taken off by DrKay. The removed credible citation from Cornell University is as follows; Lutunasobasoba n. name of legendary chief who led a migration to Fiji perhaps in the 1500s, landing at Vuda, a story often touted as the First Landing. In fact he was long preceded by Melanesians from the Solomons and Vanuatu. Stories differ, whether he remained there, died there, or travelled on to Nakauvadra Range, or even went on to Verata before dying. He was accompanied by Degei who settled at Nakauvadra. This whole movement introduced the notions of aristocratic chiefs, a foreign notion to earlier immigrants. Fijian–English Dictionary: with notes on Fijian culture and natural history-Ronald Gatty. Suva,Fiji, pg 149, 009. https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/28702

The definition for Degei in the Cornell University Fijian-English dictionary is as follows; Degei n. founding ancestral spirit-god, immigrant to Fiji, who assumes the form of a giant snake living in the Nakauvadra mountains of Ra Province. He is harmless and usually rather indifferent to human affairs. Sometimes mentioned as being a younger brother of Lutunasobasoba, who led a fairly recent immigration hardly more than a few hundred years ago. There is sometime reference to Degei I and a later Degei II. The name derives from the snake flicking out its tongue. Legends tell of his pet fowl Turukawa being killed by the Ciri Twins at a place called Conua at the Nakauvadra Range, which brought on the Nakauvadra wars as a result of Degei’s anger. The Twins were exiled, and were swept away along the Wainibuka River, downstream in a flood from their refuge at village Narauyabe, village of Degei’s Tongan canoe-builder Rokola who was protecting them. That village had been successfully attacked by Vueti, from Verata, a champion for Degei. Vueti late became the first Roko Tui Bau, and founder of super-tribe Vusaratu of Kubuna Territory. Thunder has been attributed to Degei moving about in his Nakauvadra cave. Offerings were left at that cave.

Disambiguation link notification for September 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Fijians, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malani (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:09, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Saqiwa (talk) 08:27, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For your information, there is a debate on WP:RSN on why the Thesis on the Life Ratu Cakobau below and the family lineage of the Vunivalu of Bau provided by the late Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi should not be removed from the article of Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani. The contributors view on WP:RSN of the late Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi and the reasons provided that his lineage knowledge is still not sufficient is really inconsistent, unfairly assessed and biased when compared to other source contributors. For ease of reading, the debate is outlined below. Saqiwa (talk) 07:37, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thesis: Fiji in 'The Life and Times of Cakobau: The Bauan State to 1855'

1. Source. Title: Fiji in 'The Life and Times of Cakobau: The Bauan State to 1855'- A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the University of Otago, New Zealand. Author: Hurray P. Heasley, B.A. (Hons.), Otago. August, 2010. Page Number 31: Genealogy on the Origin of the 1st Vunivalu from Nakorotubu, Ra presented on page 31 by the late Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi, Roko Tui Bau & 2006-2009 Vice President of Fiji.

2. Article. The above removed source was cited on Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani.

3. Content. On page 31, the late Solicitor and former Vice President of Fiji and Roko Tui Bau, Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi explains the original ancestor lineage of the title of Vunivalu of Bau and is a credible backup source to the statement Nadurucoko the original Gonesau, was the father of Nailatikau Nabuinivuaka, the first (1st) Vunivalu of Bau and Kubuna and link the first and original title holder of Cakobau's title to Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani's ancestor from Nakorotubu, Ra.

It is useful to reinstate this thesis to the article so that information on wikipedia are more informative and in totality according to the original objectives of the founders of Wikipedia. Saqiwa (talk) 08:31, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Copying and pasting comments made by others to Wikipedia talk pages onto your user talk page

Hi Saqiwa. Please don't copy and paste comments made by others on other talk pages or noticeboards (like WP:RSN) onto this talk page because doing so may likely be seen as a copyright violation per WP:CWW. Although Wikipedia's licensing allows content found on it to be reused, proper attribution needs to be provided when doing so; moreover, copying and pasting posts made by others on other page to your talk page (including their signatures) may give the impression that these other editors actually made the comment on this page when in fact they did not. If you want reference comments made by others on other pages, please either use internal links to the discussion itself or add links to individual diffs instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:08, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moving Adi Laufitu Malani

I've requested to move Adi Laufitu Malani back to Laufitu Malani because other articles using for people with the Adi title don't include it in the article's title. I don't know much (read: anything) about Adi Laufitu Malani, but the article title seems inconsistent to me - most other Wikipedia articles for people do not include their honorific titles in the article title unless it's an essential part of their name (e.g. Mother Teresa would never be referred to as just Teresa). Since you moved it away from the name I'm proposing to move it to, I thought you would probably want to respond at Talk:Adi Laufitu Malani. Also, please let me know if you think I got this wrong. Alex Cohn (let's chat!) 19:31, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ Alex Cohn. Do not change Adi Laufitu Malani's name title to Laufitu Malani. A recent inclusion of a 1 line sentence on a newly created Laufitu article that Laufitu is related to Adi Laufitu Malani will definitely not help in the misrepresentation and confusion in Fiji's history and information sharing. Confusion and misrepresentation of family genealogy usually thrive from such vague 1 line sentence. The two Laufitus are from different generations and different provinces, strictly speaking and are only related by marriage through Adi Laufitu Malani's father, Ratu Meli Salabogi (and brother Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani) from Ra province through the mother (Adi Asinate Senirewa) daughter of Roko Vilisoni Tuiketei, younger brother of Roko Malani (2) (who named Malani the new born child who became the grandfather of Adi Laufitu Malani during his visit to Nakorotubu, Ra) and younger brother of Ratu Tevita Uluilakeba (1) from the Vuanirewa clan of Tubou, Lakeba, Lau. Adi Laufitu Malani is only a namesake and great great grand niece of Laufitu from Totoya, the wife of Roko Malani (1) from an earlier generation. You might be able to understand where I am coming due to previous concerns and observations of twisted information as in; Monarchy of Fiji, Roko Tui Bau, Vunivalu of Bau, Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani, Malani, Lake Tanganyika, etc. in respective talk page discussions.Saqiwa (talk) 09:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ Alex Cohn. I have expressed my appreciation in Talk: Adi Laufitu Malani but just for the record in my user talk page, I now understand the need for the title change to Laufitu Malani and Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani.Saqiwa (talk) 09:16, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Roko Malani link to Vunivalu of Bau article

I have added a paragraph or two on Roko Malani's article to the Vunivalu of Bau article as there was no initial link to the Vunivalu of Bau prior to my edition. I am reiterating my concern on the lack of clarity and incomplete information about these mentioned articles on wikipedia. Saqiwa (talk) 07:11, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Saqiwa. If you want to explain or clarify why you're making a particular edit to an article, then the best places to do that either (1) in an edit summary, (2) on the relevant article's talk page or (3) a combination of (1) and (2) if really needed. Editors interested in Vunivalu of Bau or Roko Malani are more likely going to be watching those articles than they are going to be watching your user talk page because any discussion related to the content of those articles is supposed to take place on their talk pages. You should always try to leave an edit summary whenever you edit because it aids others in understanding why the edit was made. It also helps if your edit summary includes a link to the relevant Wikipedia policy or guideline the edit is based upon, but this is not required. If you find that it's too hard to explain why an edit was made in just an edit summary, you can then further clarify by posting something on the article's talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:31, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly. Thanks for the guidance, I will do a combination of (1) and (2) as advised.Saqiwa (talk) 07:39, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Roko Malani (1879–1933)

Hey Saqiwa, I've started the draft article Draft:Roko Malani (1879–1933) and I'll help you with adding the disambiguation hatnote when the draft is moved to mainspace. The draft needs a bit of work before it is ready for mainspace, the article is very confusing and doesn't explain what this Roko Malani is notable for, it instead seems to only talk about geneology. Could you maybe turn the draft into a biographical article like our other encyclopedic articles are? Feel free to ping me if you need assistance. – Thjarkur (talk) 13:03, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Þjarkur|Thjarkur Please check.Saqiwa (talk) 13:29, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is a real need to review editors and administrators for the inconsistencies and selective editing of my articles, the latest being the comments on Roko Malani (1879-1933).

If Thjarkur is denying the Draft:Roko Malani (1879–1933) article because of lack of independent source, then what about the wikipedia articles on the list of Fijian chiefs:

Kanakana, Ratu Epeli, Fijian chief (Tui Suva) Katonivere, Ratu Aisea, Tui Macuata (paramount chief of Macuata) Kadavulevu, Ratu Penaia, Vunivalu of Bau (1901–1914) Madraiwiwi, Ratu Joni (the First), chief (1859–1920) Nailatikau, Ratu Epeli (the First) (1842–1901), Vunivalu of Bau Niumataiwalu, founder of the Vuanirewa dynasty in the Lau Islands Rasolo, first Tui Nayau Rokocegu, Maculeku, Tui Dreketi Rokomatu, Adi Joana, Tui Sigatoka Sovasova, Ratu Jovesa, Tui Vitogo (1942–2005) Tupou, Ratu Taliai, Tui Nayau (d. 1875) Tarau of Tovu Totoya, Fijian chieftainess Udre Udre, Ratu, 19th century cannibal Ulugalala, Alifereti Finau, Tui Nayau (d. 1934) Visawaqa, Ratu Tanoa, Vunivalu of Bau (1800s) Uluilakeba I, successor to Rasolo (q.v.) as Tui Nayau, but not so installed

If we look at the discussion Draft:Roko Malani (1879–1933) and the editing history from Monarchy of Fiji, Vunivalu of Bau, Roko Malani, Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani, it is obvious that certain editor/s have moved away from the wikipedia rules and are using other reasons for not allowing the article on Roko Malani 1879-1933 from Ra. My concern has been consistent on the inconsistencies and selective editing to my articles. My observation of the recent micromanaging and scrutiny to my contributions seems to have started from the recent exposure of suppressed Fiji's history that are well documented but suppressed for reasons well known. Saqiwa (talk) 09:32, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kudpung กุดผึ้ง and Bri.public. Please help me. I refer to the Draft:Roko Malani (1879–1933) article and how Thjarkur is inconsistent by allowing an article of a different person that is also called Roko Malani of Lau province in Fiji and disallowing a draft article of another Roko Malani (1879-1933) of Ra province also of Fiji but with similar independent quoted sources. For your ease of reference, I am providing the link to the write up for both people with the same name and I cannot understand the inconsistencies in the reasoning given by Thjarkur that the sources used for one is acceptable than the other. Considering the similarities in how the sources were quoted for both people, all I am asking for is for the Draft:Roko Malani (1879–1933) to be listed as a disambiguation list of Roko Malani. I cannot understand the authoritarian stance of just keeping one Roko Malani as it continuously demonstrate my earlier concern of having complete information of Fijian history and selective editing to my contributions. Similar observations of selective and inconsistent and sudden deletion of contributions to articles such as Monarchy of Fiji, Vunivalu of Bau, Roko Malani, Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani, Nakorotubu is really worrying and question the integrity of the wikipedia online articles.Saqiwa (talk) 12:32, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion copied from Draft talk:Roko Malani (1879–1933)

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Who is he and what was he notable for?

Saqiwa, who was Roko Malani and what is he notable for? And which independant sources include significant discussion of him? – Thjarkur (talk) 13:43, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thjarkur Roko Malani was the father of the two brothers Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani and Ratu Meli Salabogi. There are limited independent sources about him like other Fijian chiefs written on wikipedia articles. However, what he is notable for can be termed as 'unsung' as his marriage to the rival traditional family caused the stability, understanding, compromise in modern Fijian hierarchical power. The outcome of his marriage action resulted in stability, compromise, etc. that can be read in his sons Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani's article in terms of national and traditional authority, please refer to Fiji Times article of Nov 13th, 1995, etc.Saqiwa (talk) 14:39, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no independant sources about him then he isn't suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. We need more than one Fiji Times article to demonstrate that he was instrumental in the stability of Fijian hierarchical power, because if that is the case then there will be multiple secondary sources we could cite for that. Be careful not to synthesize material regarding lineages, this all looks too much like original research. We only summarize what reliable sources have said about a topic and we don't string together multiple related family lineages to try to tell a story. – Thjarkur (talk) 14:46, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thjarkur. Manage to find two other independent sources for Roko Malani (1879-1933) on the Fiji Sun, (1) (10th October, 2015) http://fijisun.com.fj/2015/10/10/opinion-cleaning-up-our-history-a-way-forward-for-itaukei/ and again on Fiji Sun (2) Mosese Bulitavo (25 September 2015). "The Politics of Fiji – A Way Forward For ITaukei People". http://fijisun.com.fj/2015/09/29/the-politics-of-fiji-a-way-forward-for-itaukei-people/. Consistency and fairness would be appreciated with notable achievements of other Fijian chiefs being included in the wikipedia article without much scrutiny of independent sources. Again to reiterate my concerns on the Teahouse discussion on the need for consistency, fairness, I would appreciate if the article on Roko Malani (1879-1933) is edited in a swift manner as it was deleted without any courteous consultation. The noble intentions of the wikipedia founders needs to be maintained for transparency and online encyclopedia reliability. Saqiwa (talk) 02:33, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Politics of Fiji does not mention Roko Malani and the "Cleaning up our history" 1) only mentions Roko Malani in passing 2) is not about this Roko Malani but someone who was alive in 1959, and 3) is an opinion piece but not a reliable source. Achivements of other Fijian chiefs should not be included in other Wikipedia articles if that information has not been published in reliable sources, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The article is currently not an encyclopedic article about Roko Malani (1879–1933) and is unfit for mainspace. Please be careful to only reflect what reliable secondary sources have said about a subject and please stop doing original research, other users have also discussed this with you. – Thjarkur (talk) 02:45, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thjarkur Roko Malani is actually mentioned in "clearing up our history" http://fijisun.com.fj/2015/10/10/opinion-cleaning-up-our-history-a-way-forward-for-itaukei/ and not just in passing. It is clearly explained there that he was the grandson of Salabogi, spelt as Salabogee in W Smythes' report of 1862. In the list of Fijian chiefs, a lot of contributors have been including original research and the articles have not been taken down. Again, there is a need for consistency and fairness. I think that I need to take this up again with Teahouse.

Saqiwa (talk) 03:00, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To assist your eyes and reading aid, I am going to quote word for word to back up that the Government of Fiji supported- newspaper- Fiji Sun article "Clearing up our history" http://fijisun.com.fj/2015/10/10/opinion-cleaning-up-our-history-a-way-forward-for-itaukei/ is about Roko Malani (1879-1933).

Kuliniasi Malani's death certificate proved that his father was Dewalarua, the son of Salabogi. Salabogi spelt Salabogee in Colonel W.J.Smythe's report was one of the chiefs of Nakorotubu present at the 1859 discussion with fellow chiefs Nacamavuto, Daunibau and Ratu Isikeli Komaisavai on Cakobau's first offer for cession. Despite the conspiracy to label the descendants of Raivalita (unknown) by NLC hearing of 1915, on September, 18, 1959, during installation of the last Vunivalu of Bau, Kuliniasi Roko Malani II of Nabukadra, Ra grandson of Kuliniyasi Malani(who was concealed by Ratu Seniloli in 1918) traditionally endorsed the installation of Ratu George Cakobau as the Vunivalu of Bau and escorted Ratu George Cakobau to the Roko Tui Bau after they had spent the previous night at the Vatanitawake before the ceremony.

If the above quote for Roko Malani (1879-1933) is still not valid to include his name for your disambiguation list of Roko Malani names for unexplained reasons, then my observations of inconsistencies and questionable selective editing seems valid. I am sure that the wikipedia founders will be sad to find that unexplained manipulations and questionable authoritarian attitude have encroached into this noble online self editing encyclopedia. I say this with sincere sadness knowing that the article monitors would just be waiting for a justification to take me out just to protect information and interests.Saqiwa (talk) 11:20, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you make all your replies at the Administrators' Noticeboard case of which you have been notified. - Bri.public (talk) 15:33, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents § Saqiwa and original research on Fijian chieftain lineages

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. – Thjarkur (talk) 15:01, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thjarkur This is really an abuse of power in editing privilege. There is really evidence of selective editing in keeping similar sourced materials in Roko Malani compared to my articles including the Roko Malani article 1879-1933. Wikipedia should be aware that this is happening and the reputation of wikipedia is at stake.Saqiwa (talk) 03:18, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will continue to reiterate the selective editing that I have observed so far. The latest incident proves my point that while the original Roko Malani article has been kept and approved, my Other Roko Malani additions have been taken out with more quoted sourced materials than the original Roko Malani article. Even the quotations (1) and (2) for Roko Malani were added by me- Saqiwa and surprisingly approved by Thjarkur (talk). Yet along the same article, when the additions to other Roko Malani were listed with similar quoted materials, it was unfairly taken out.Saqiwa (talk) 07:34, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Take your dog for a walk

Hi Saqiwa. I really suggest that you slow down at Roko Malani and avoid any further edit warring in trying to get certain content re-added to the article. no matter how right you think you are or how right you may even be, the approach you're taking is not productive. You're almost at a WP:3RR violation and once you crossover that line, you're going to find things even more difficult. You were WP:BOLD in trying to improve the article, but you've been WP:REVERTed by multiple editors; these editors may be wrong, but it's now your obligation per WP:BRD and WP:DR to convince them and others that they are indeed wrong by discussing things at Talk:Roko Malani. The problems with the article's title were resolved by discussing things on its talk page, so there's no reason why something similar cannot happen regarding this latest content dispute you're involved in.

Wikipedia is a collaborative project with lots of people from around the world participating. This sometimes means that it can be quite frustrating when other editors are reverting your edits or disagreeing with you; however, part of being WP:HERE is figuring ways to resolve such disagreements in a way that's good for Wikipedia. We may not always win these discussions, but "winning" on a personal level isn't really the point. So, if you start to feel frustrated, perhaps you should follow WP:DOGGY and step away for awhile and let things cool down. Editors who start to become too difficult for others to deal with often find the Wikipedia community start to thinking whether the positive aspects of their editing outweigh any negative aspects of their editing, and editors who seem to be more of a negative than a positive often don't last for too long. I'm sure you're quite knowledgeable on things related to Fiji and I'm sure you are passionate about Fiji, but you need to figure out how to use that knowledge and passion in a way that's in accordance with relevant Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Marchjuly (talk). I have responded in Talk:Roko Malani. Thanks.Saqiwa (talk) 07:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nakorotubu District

Hi there- this is about your edits in [Nakorotubu District]. Please read [WP:Circular]- it expressly says you shouldn't be using other Wikipedia articles as references. I did mention it in an edit summary, but now I see you have reinstated it- I have opened a discussion on the talkpage, so please respond there. Curdle (talk) 11:38, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Article talkpages

Hi there. Just in case you didnt realise, editors are not supposed to reformat or remove posts from article talkpages, like you did here [2] (even if it is your own post). If you decide you have changed your mind about something, you can strike out the text using <s>...</s> which draws a line through the text, and add an appropriate edit summary, but you should never delete it, especially if other editors have responded to the posts. Curdle (talk) 12:40, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Topic banned

Per the closure of this discussion, you are subject to a topic ban from articles and talkpages relating to Fiji or Fijian history, broadly construed. Yunshui ^雲 _水 09:50, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yunshui ^雲 _水 Good, try hard to suppress the truth about Fiji's history. Perhaps you might want also want to ban information on https://en.everybodywiki.com/Monarchy_of_Fiji ?? Too late.. Bye Bye. Saqiwa (talk) 17:31, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Everybodywiki is not a Wikimedia project, so you are free to edit there however you see fit. You are only banned from editing about Fiji on the English-language version of Wikipedia; this topic ban does not cover other Wikimedia projects or other versions of Wikipedia (and obviously does not cover sites like Everybodywiki which are not affiliated with Wikipedia). Yunshui ^雲 _水 22:03, 24 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As explained above and clarified by Yunshui, you've been banned from editing articles related to Fuji per an ANI discussion. If you disagree with this, then you should discuss things with Yunshui to find out if there's anyway for you to appeal the ban. However, you shouldn't edit articles like Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani as long as the ban is in effect because doing so will only lead to your account being blocked once again, most likely for a period longer than 48 hours. I believe you mean well and are trying to make sure correct information (at least information you truly believe to be correct) about Fiji is added to Wikipedia, but you need to do so in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines and you need to make sure you comply with these policy and guidelines if you wish to remain an editor in good standing. Perhaps there are too many Wikipedia rules for you to try and do the things that you want to do; maybe you'd be better off trying to add this information to another website such as some of the ones listed here. Regardless of what you decide to do, continuing to violate your topic ban is only going to lead to longer and longer blocks until some administrator decides that enough is enough and finally indefinitely blocks your account from further editing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:10, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discriminatory and Selective Ban of Saqiwa

Yunshui,Marchjuly (talk) It is so funny that while you have banned me from contribution on Fiji's history with suppression of information about Nakorotubu, Ratu Kuliniyasi Roko Malani, Ratu Wilisoni Tuiketei Malani, Roko Tui Bau, Vunivalu of Bau, etc. yet, you have allowed ridiculous claim in the Burebasaga article that it was once owned by Lau. Also other unsourced statements of other chiefs and provinces in Fiji is not even questioned. It is now clear whose agenda is really promoted here. Saqiwa (talk) 07:29, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

October 2019

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for violating your topic ban on articles relating to Fiji. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:09, 25 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for violations of your topic ban on articles relating to Fiji. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Yunshui ^雲 _水 08:12, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. gadfium 08:31, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Roko Malani (1879–1933) (January 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DGG was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Roko Malani (1879–1933) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Roko Malani (1879–1933), click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DGG ( talk ) 23:57, 13 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:43, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]