User talk:Tkamanzi

DotConnectAftica / .africa

As you clearly work for DCA as indicated by your username and email address on the DCA website, please refer to Wikipedia´s pages on conflict of interest. Perhaps Elonka can point you in the right direction.

As things stand, DCA have applied for the .dotafrica TLD string. Where you are able to demonstrate that ICANN have requested, for example a change in the application, with a verified reference from ICANN it would be appropriate to change the details on Wikipedia to reflect the change in the string applied for. (Elekebia (talk) 15:54, 8 August 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Working for DCA does not alter the facts. What it takes is someone who knows how to write a neutral article based on Wikipedia's standards and so I did some of the contribute to the edits. However for you to go back and try to change the facts of the history of the whole company instead of even the application is illegal and you should cease and decease from doing this. DCA did not apply for a .dotafrica string and whatever we clarified should be acceptable to the reader, except one like you who is trying to misappropriate facts. When ICANN will send an updated reference, DCA will also note that as part of the history for facts. Until then, I would appreciate if you STOP manipulating the facts.Tkamanzi (talk) 22:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No I simply reverted the article as you have done previously. You will note that the edits of all references to .africa replacing them with .dotafrica was not performed by me. Please spare me the bedroom law lessons. As long as the article reflects that DCA applied for the .dotafrica string, I am satisfied. (Elekebia (talk) 16:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC))[reply]

'and you should cease and desist' - telling me I should die is not nice ;) (Elekebia (talk) 16:20, 8 August 2012 (UTC))[reply]

No one said that you should 'die' but changing the project history is illegal and not factual. Why is the clarification DCA made not enough for you? We already have stated that the ICANN report shows a .dotafrica. It would be misleading to DCA followers and readers to say DCA has applied for a .dotafrica. Cna you get that now. What would be the point of misleading? We have clarified already.Tkamanzi (talk) 22:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was joking, I think you meant ´cease and desist´. Please can you be clear about one thing, did DCA apply for the .dotafrica string in TAS or not and if not what is the explanation? An error by ICANN perhaps? (Elekebia (talk) 16:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Ok corrected;) I am telling you that we are clear DCA applied for a .africa string, as reflected by a six year campaign. That is why it was not fair to change everything that DCA has done, as it will misrepresent the whole project and company and what it worked for. At this point, of course .dotafrica is said to be an error, who made that error I cannot say. But ICANN has already committed to correct it soonest as they put an error management procedure, as there were many other errors on other strings reported as well. The delay is simply until they put the procedure in place. We hope correction will take place in next two weeks. - At least you can get direct clarification from a company man;) I hope this helps.Tkamanzi (talk) 22:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. I have now edited the article to reflect the facts. I am sure there will be a lot less confused people. (Elekebia (talk) 17:12, 8 August 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Thank you also. It is always good to clear the air via communication. But in looking at the current article, the "product" and the "focus" under the logo box still shows .dotafrica. May I kindly ask that you correct that as well in line with your current understanding? I rather not do it so I do not contradict you? Thanks.Tkamanzi (talk) 22:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These edits were made by an anonymous editor. I note that they have also edited my clarification statement. Such is the nature of Wikipedia huh? (Elekebia (talk) 17:29, 8 August 2012 (UTC))[reply]

I understand, however it is wrong. Is it possible to protect the entire article due to abuse reported? I appreciate if you can help! one cannot even see the userID for the offender?.Tkamanzi (talk) 22:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

--Please could you refer to the talk page on Talk:DotConnectAfrica. My aim is to improve the article, not engage in a sparring match with DCA. The article has many issues and to this end I have asked for guidance on how to IMPROVE the article from the community. For example, I would like to edit that London is in England, not Ireland, but you seem to revert any contributions that were not made by yourself (and this is just one of many problems with the article). Please let's work this through on the talk page and get a quality article together. Elekebia (talk) 18:13, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I could not leave your comment above unanswered. I did not add "Ireland" as we have no presence there, but those who were vandalizing the article were adding many countries as a prank, and for the record here is what they added, as I have saved it "... Addis Ababa Ethiopia, South Africa, London Ireland, California, USA, Wavre Belgium, Jerusalem Israel, Eindhoven Netherlands, Lisbon Portugal, Jedda East Wyoming, Paris Syria and Hanoi Vietnam". Obviously that is why I shouted for protection for the articleTkamanzi (talk) 22:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to DotConnectAfrica, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 00:57, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. The thread is DotConnectAfrica. Thank you. --Drm310 (talk) 05:16, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed your recent edit to DotConnectAfrica does not have an edit summary. Please provide one before saving your changes to an article, as the summaries are quite helpful to people browsing an article's history. Thanks! — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 13:57, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Minor edits

Can you please stop marking all your edits as minor? They're obviously not minor and it makes it harder to follow what you're doing. For a definition of minor edits, read WP:MINOR.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 14:01, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously?

You revert all that work with no edit summary and you mark the edit as minor? How in the world do you expect anyone to assume that you're doing this in good faith. Please discuss your edits on the article's talk page.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 15:48, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree no problem. It was a habit to mark it as minor, not deliberate. corrected.Tkamanzi (talk) 16:07, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please could you also remember to summarise your edits when they are not minor. Thanks! Elekebia (talk) 16:20, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The summary of the edit Elekbia that I have restarted the article since we have called for experience industry editors to improve article, the way it is edited now is very much unbalanced and non-factual. I thin you folks are attempting to edit it simply based on assisting UNIFORUM as a .africa winner. DCA's article was not based on the current win/lose it is based on all the factual efforts it did on .africa. I insist other editors be involved. thanks Tkamanzi (talk) 16:44, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other editors are involved. Please do stop the revert war, take some time to cool off and read some of the policies. Laylah is a highly experienced editor and is giving good guidance. It won't hurt to have a look at some of the links to Wikipedia policies he has provided. Elekebia (talk) 16:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at DotConnectAfrica shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:51, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:55, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 00:23, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry case

Your name has been mentioned in connection with a sockpuppetry case. Please refer to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tkamanzi for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to cases before editing the evidence page. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:24, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summary

Hi Tkamanzi, I note that you are marking all your edits as minor again. Please could you be so kind as to remember to fill in the edit summary and not mark them as minor (unless they clearly are) as it is extremely helpful to other editors. For a definition of minor edits, read WP:MINOR, Thanks! --Elekebia (talk) 12:57, 21 September 2012 (UTC.

ok sure, forgot!Tkamanzi (talk) 17:01, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/No-campaign.africa concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/No-campaign.africa, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 13:46, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission No-campaign.africa

Hello Tkamanzi. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled No-campaign.africa.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/No-campaign.africa}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 19:04, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]