User Talk: Limegreencoral

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

Welcome!

Hi Limegreencoral! I noticed your contributions ↗ to :Majeerteen Sultanate ↗ and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

{{Clickable button 2|Help:Introduction|Learn more about editing|class=mw-ui-progressive|style=margin-left: 1.6em;}}

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia ↗ page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

{{Clickable button 2|Wikipedia:Teahouse|Get help at the Teahouse|style=margin-left: 1.6em;}}

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

{{Clickable button 2|Wikipedia:Task Center|Volunteer at the Task Center|style=margin-left: 1.6em;}}

Please remember to sign your messages on talk page ↗s by typing four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing!  <span style="text-shadow:#000 0em 0em 1em">☿ <span style="color:#6a0dad">Apaugasma</span> (<span style="color:#000">talk</span> ☉ ↗)</span> 20:12, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

:Thank you for the help Limegreencoral (talk) 23:14, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

December 2022

<div class="user-block" style="padding: 5px; margin-bottom: 0.5em; border: 1px solid #a9a9a9; background-color: #ffefd5; min-height: 40px">40px|left|alt=Stop icon with clock ↗<div style="margin-left:45px">You have been '''blocked ↗''' from editing from certain pages (:Sultanate of Dawaro ↗ and :Gurgura ↗) for a period of '''72 hours''' for edit warring ↗. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions ↗. </div><div style="margin-left:45px">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 ↗.</div><div style="margin-left:45px">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: <code><nowiki>{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}</nowiki></code>.  <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em;" class="texhtml"> '''Salvio'''</span> 23:31, 22 December 2022 (UTC)</div></div>

Adal Sultanate

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Please do not add original research ↗ or novel syntheses ↗ of published material to articles. Please cite a reliable source ↗ for all of your contributions. Thank you. Magherbin (talk) 14:10, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Majeerteen Sultanate

alt=Information icon|25x25px ↗ Please do not add original research ↗ or novel syntheses ↗ of published material to articles. Please cite a reliable source ↗ for all of your contributions. Thank you.

Replayerr (talk) 11:15, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

:Before accusing me of using original research, please read the sources cited. Nothing I have said is original research. Limegreencoral (talk) 14:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

February 2025

25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello, I'm Magherbin. I noticed that you recently made an edit in which your edit summary did not appear to describe the change you made. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary ↗. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page ↗. Thanks. Magherbin (talk) 23:04, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

:Yes, thank you for the reminder. Will do. Limegreencoral (talk) 23:21, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Harla

this is totally false information, there is no subclan of Harla in darod and the reality is that every somali person knows that .
http://www.abtirsi.com/view.php?person=1&abtirsiLang=1 ↗
https://www.refworld.org/publisher,IRBC,,SOM,3ae6ac7580,0.html ↗ Sam thunder (talk) 02:12, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

:Read the citations, it is not a random statement, it is sourced. It states Harla is one of the Kombe clans. You may not agree with it, but you cannot remove well soured information from a Wikipedia page because you don't believe it. @Sam thunder Limegreencoral (talk) 14:22, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
::I understand you believe the Harla are a sub-clan of Darod. However, based on my understanding of Somali genealogy, including my own Darod lineage, this is not accurate.
::Distinct Origins: The Harla has a distinct historical and cultural background, separate from the Somali clan structure. Their origins are generally understood to predate the major Somali clan formations.
::Genealogical Discrepancies: The links you've provided, which you believe prove a Darod connection, do not align with established Somali genealogical records. These records maintain a clear separation.
::Lack of Consensus: Among Somali elders and genealogical experts, there is no consensus supporting the claim that the Harla are Darod. In fact, the prevailing understanding is that they are a separate, distinct group.
::I respect your perspective, but I must respectfully disagree based on the information available. I'm open to further discussion, but it's important to rely on credible and widely accepted sources when discussing Somali clan
::Harla are their own ethnicity, they are not Somali, how can a major ethnicity be a subclan of another ethnic
::Please, if you are not Somali and don't have enough information about Somali genealogy, don't disturb this article Sam thunder (talk) 14:49, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
:::Harla live still in the Somali region they are Somali. Just because you are unaware of the academic literature or Somali tradition does not change their identity. They identify as Somali as do the Harla portions amongst the Afar and Oromo- they were merely a clan not an ethnicity. Abcsomwiz (talk) 02:22, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
::even the links you are saying that they are proving you claims are broken links that are not working Sam thunder (talk) 14:52, 17 March 2025 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism

Hi, please make sure that when you revert vandalism (as you did here ↗) you warn the editor on their talk page. You can use Twinkle ↗ to do this quickly and easily. Thanks, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:25, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:Thanks for the heads up, will do that next time. Limegreencoral (talk) 01:38, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

Dervish flag

please explain your reverts on the Dervish movement page. McManDan (talk) 20:30, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Adal (historical region)

30px|alt=Stop icon ↗ You may be '''blocked from editing ↗ without further warning''' the next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary ↗.  Magherbin (talk) 21:56, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

:You are doing original research. Adal is not a Harari state. Limegreencoral (talk) 21:57, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:: The source states that do not remove content from pages, discuss your edits on the talk page. Magherbin (talk) 21:58, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::You are presenting the fact that Adal sultanate centering on Harar makes it a Harari state. This is your assumption and original research. Your same sources mention the other groups. Limegreencoral (talk) 21:59, 19 May 2025 (UTC)
:::: Its a Harari state there's lots of references on the article already that mentions this. Its not Somali infact they werent even part of Adal just allies. Magherbin (talk) 22:00, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

Rasul Ali

Hello dear Limegreencoral. I noticed you're quite active on African anthropological pages and I thank you for your contributions. The page "Rasul ibn Ali" is in need of a review. This version ↗ needs a review by an experienced editor such as yourself. If you have reviewed it and found it satisfactory, maybe you could be kind enough to publish it. Thank you. 82.45.168.148 ↗ (talk) 10:55, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

:What do you mean publish? I don't believe its a draft. You can just undo the recent edit if you don't agree with it. Either click undo on the view history tab or just click on your last version and publish changes. Limegreencoral (talk) 11:28, 14 July 2025 (UTC)

July 2025

<div class="user-block uw-pblock" style="padding: 5px; margin-bottom: 0.5em; border: 1px solid #a9a9a9; background-color: #ffefd5; min-height: 40px">40px|left|alt=Stop icon with clock ↗<div style="margin-left:45px">You have been '''blocked ↗''' temporarily from editing from certain pages (:Outline of Puntland ↗ and :Puntland ↗) for edit warring over uncited material. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions ↗. </div><div style="margin-left:45px">If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks ↗, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: <code><nowiki>{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}</nowiki></code>.  BusterD (talk) 13:55, 14 July 2025 (UTC)</div></div>

{{unblock reviewed |1=I don't believe I was edit warring in the Puntland page. I'm not sure what the justification for my block is. I reverted the edits that changed the article into claiming Puntland was still a federal member state despite its withdrawal from the federal system in March 31 2024 and its choice to operate as an independent state within Somalia. The previous edits also changed the official state name despite there being no reason for this. I reversed the edit then afterwards added a direct source from the government statement which supported the original claim of the articles already cited. After realizing there was a disagreement, I decided to take it to the talk page to discuss. There wasn't an edit war. I was not the one who was the changing the page from what it originally was. The topic of whether or not Puntland is a de-facto autonomous or independent state had already been discussed previously. The reason for my block states that I "repeatedly insert improperly sourced material without discussion". I disagree with this because I did choose to go the talk page to discuss. The only material I inserted was the official government statement. |decline = Procedural decline only as the block has expired. <span style="color: Navy;">'''Ponyo'''</span><sup><span style="color: Navy;">''bons mots''</span></sup> 20:15, 21 July 2025 (UTC)}}

{{ping|BusterD}} I would kindly ask for some clarity on what exactly about my edits were uncited material. I believe the citations within the Puntland article supported what I was saying. This is just a question outside of my unblock request. Limegreencoral (talk) 14:42, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
:: Not Buster, but I'll reply to this: you should cite controversial claims and not rely on sources being elsewhere in the article. Otherwise, am I correct in saying you reverted twice on two articles prior to the block? That could just about be regarded as edit warring at a stretch. I would suggest you use the talk page to establish a consensus on the articles' content, to demonstrate the partial block is no longer needed. PhilKnight (talk) 21:47, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
:::The original article before being changed already had sources supporting the claim of Puntland withdrawing from federal institutions. The citations are within the first sentence. I'm a bit confused when you say cite controversial claims, do you mean mention the existing citations in the edit summary? If so, I can do that next time.
:::When a user changed the article to claim that Puntland was still somehow a federal member despite sources stating it would operate as a an independent state within Somalia, I reverted this and explained why. My second revert then added in another citation which was the original government statement. Afterwards I went to the talk page to discuss and come to an understanding since I specifically did not want to get into an edit war. My revert was because someone was making an edit that was not accurate. I do not believe this was an edit war or an attempt at disruptive editing. Limegreencoral (talk) 23:56, 16 July 2025 (UTC)
:::{{reply to|PhilKnight}} I also wanted to ask a side question regarding my unblock request. In the request for unblock category, my request time says 2025-01-16T14:00:43Z. Why is the date showing Jan 16? Limegreencoral (talk) 01:26, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
::::: That must be a bug. I wouldn't worry about it. PhilKnight (talk) 01:30, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

The block has already expired, so I'm not sure if the unblock request is still relevant. {{ping|BusterD}} I would still appreciate if you could please elaborate on why my edits were disruptive, and how it was considered edit warring. As I explained earlier, I started a discussion on the page so as to not enter an edit war. I'm also still confused about what improperly cited material I inserted without discussion. Limegreencoral (talk) 14:16, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = You have recently edited a page related to '''the Horn of Africa ↗ (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes)''', a topic designated as '''''contentious ↗'''''. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as ''contentious topics''. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee ↗. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators ↗ have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit <strong>carefully and constructively</strong>, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia ↗;

comply with all applicable policies and guidelines ↗;

follow editorial and behavioural best practices;

comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and

refrain from gaming the system ↗.

<p>Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics ''procedures'', you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard ↗ or you may learn more about this contentious topic here ↗. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{tl|Ctopics/aware}} template. </p>}} <sub>signed, </sub>'''''Rosguill''''' <sup>''talk''</sup> 14:49, 6 August 2025 (UTC)

Mogadishu article

25px|alt=|link= ↗ Please stop your disruptive editing ↗.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute ↗ with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page ↗, and seek consensus ↗ with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution ↗ page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards ↗.

If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ↗.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at :Mogadishu ↗, you may be blocked from editing ↗.  AzanianPearl (talk) 09:33, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

:30px|alt=Stop icon ↗ You may be '''blocked from editing ↗ without further warning''' the next time you disrupt ↗ Wikipedia, as you did at :Mogadishu ↗.  AzanianPearl (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Let me be clear. {{Diff|Wikipedia:Administrators%27 noticeboard/Incidents|prev|1309151812|Removing a WP:AN/I thread that other users have posted in|diffonly=yes}} is generally viewed as so disruptive that a pretty severe block is in order. —'''C.Fred''' (talk ↗) 11:34, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

:I apologize, I didn't even know you commented on that. I kept trying to make the edit to remove it, but it kept saying edit conflict so I assumed edits were being made on other discussions. A user commented to me just use the talk page, so I just inferred that there wasn't any further discussion to be had. I removed the ANI after you made your Mogadishu revert saying a consensus needed to be reached since I thought it wasn't necessary anymore. Again, I am sorry I did not try to be disruptive. Limegreencoral (talk) 11:37, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

:@C.Fred I see now that I was supposed to just let the discussion be archived. I did not mean to disrupt the admin noticeboard. I assumed that once an understanding was reached on how to move forward, in this case go to the articles talk page, that the discussion would just be removed. After I saw your revert on the article, I thought that the discussion was done and that was it. Just as you commented, I removed it. It was an honest mistake which I didn't realize was not acceptable. Limegreencoral (talk) 12:02, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

:This user unfortunately does not understand the rules of Wikipedia nor does he or she seem to care for it. He/she has strong personal attachments to certain topics and shows bias to the extent of removing sourced content, as well as explaining what his definition of things are with no sources. Also afterwards has no problem with leaving in a fake source that i took out (which didnt even have information of what the line claimed). This were somali articles by the way, which he has attachment to the extent he treats it like a personal blog, including Blank reverting. It is very hard to assume good faith with that. Dolpina (talk) 08:51, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

link=|25px|alt=Information icon ↗
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. AzanianPearl (talk) 11:25, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;flex-basis: 40px">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2025 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2025|end}}-1 day}}. 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 2025 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2025|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>

Somalian is absolutely a demonym for people in Somalia.

It is not only commonly used, but is also recognized as a word by the Oxford English Dictionary ↗. CerealContainer (talk) 00:23, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

:The correct term is Somali. Refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonym#Suffixation:~:text=Somalia%20%E2%86%92%20Somalis Limegreencoral (talk) 10:37, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
::There can be multiple correct demonyms for a country. The demonyms for South Korea can include "South Korean" and "Korean" as both of their demonyms (the South Korea ↗ Wikipedia page recognizes this), yet only "South Koreans" is on that list. CerealContainer (talk) 01:13, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
:::In your example the former is for the country, the latter is for the ethnic grouping. In the case of Somalia, they are the same. Limegreencoral (talk) 01:56, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
:::{{reply to|CerealContainer}} You're using the Merriam Webster Dictionary as a source, but just because a term appears there doesn't necessarily mean it's the correct term. For example, the term 'Irelander' appears, but that isn't a demonym that is used. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Irelander
::: Limegreencoral (talk) 16:45, 9 June 2026 (UTC)
::::But Icelander is included as a demonym in Iceland ↗, which defeats the point you're trying to make. Moreover, what demonym(s) is/are "correct", at least in the way that you're using the term "correct", is your prescriptive opinion. If people speaking English use a certain term as a demonym, WP:NPOV says that English Wikipedia should not exclude that. Merriam-Webster is descriptive, which is why it documents the term "Somalian" as a valid demonym for Somalia.
::::The typical argument that "the term 'Somalian' isn't used in the Somalian language" is not a good enough reason to exclude the demonym. The word "Chinese" is not used in Mandarin either, but Chinese is clearly an English demonym for China. CerealContainer (talk) 00:11, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::{{reply to|CerealContainer}} Firstly, why did you reinstate your edits? If there's an active disagreement over an edit, it should be discussed first to avoid an edit war. Secondly, I did not mention 'Iceland', I said 'Irelander' which is not a proper demonym for the people of Ireland, but nonetheless it's still present in the Merriam Webster Dictionary (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Irelander). When it comes to demonyms in English they're not always consistent and don't necessarily have to follow typical forms, so it's 'Irish' and not 'Irelander'.
:::::More examples are 'Slovakian' (https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/Slovakian) (https://www.oed.com/dictionary/slovakian_n?tl=true) even recently being used in an article(https://www.nhlpa.com/news/young-slovakian-team-optimistic-heading-into-semifinal-against-team-usa/) when it's Slovak.
:::::'Finlander' in both the OED and Merriam dictionary (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Finlander) (https://www.oed.com/dictionary/finlander_n) (https://www.dictionary.com/browse/finlander) when it's Finnish or Finn.
:::::'Madagascarian' also in both the OED the Merriam dictionary (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Madagascarian) (https://www.oed.com/dictionary/madagascarian_n) when it's Malagasy.
:::::'Luxembourgian' also in the Merriam dictionary among others (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Luxembourgian) (https://www.dictionary.com/browse/luxembourgian) (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/luxembourgian) when its Luxembourger or Luxembourgish.
:::::'Thailander' (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/thailander) (https://www.oed.com/dictionary/thailander_n) when it's Thai.
:::::'Sudanian' (https://www.oed.com/dictionary/sudanian_adj) when it's Sudanese.
:::::'Scotlander' (https://www.yourdictionary.com/scotlander) (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Scotlander) when it's Scottish or Scots.
:::::'Icelandian' (https://www.oed.com/dictionary/icelandian_n) when it's Icelander or Icelandic.
:::::'Netherlander' or 'Netherlandian' (https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/netherlander) (https://www.dictionary.com/browse/netherlander) (https://www.oed.com/dictionary/netherlander_n) (https://www.oed.com/dictionary/netherlandian_adj) when it's Dutch.
:::::Another example would be 'Naija' which is present in the Oxford English Dictionary as a term for people of Nigeria (https://www.oed.com/dictionary/naija_adj?tl=true), but it's still not a proper demonym even though it's used by some.
:::::The people of Eswatini are 'Swazi' yet the improper 'Eswatinian' has been used by some governments (https://dutchwaterauthorities.com/news/from-hardenberg-to-eswatini/#:~:text=Eswatinian) (https://media.un.org/photo/en/asset/oun7/oun760841#:~:text=Eswatinian) (https://africa.sis.gov.eg/english/african-countries/eswatini/eswatinian-profile/#:~:text=Eswatinian).
:::::Same with Kiribati where it's people are 'I-Kiribati', yet the improper 'Kiribatian' has been used (https://www.fairplanet.org/story/why-kiribatian-farmer-ioane-teitiota-declared-himself-to-be-the-worlds-first-ever-climate-change-refugee/) (https://theconversation.com/most-kiribatian-households-are-mulling-climate-migration-and-thats-just-the-start-51627) (https://www.yourdictionary.com/kiribatian)
:::::The people of Oman are called 'Omani' and not 'Omanian' even though there's some usage of the latter (https://www.newindianexpress.com/india/2026/Jun/11/all-22-indian-crew-members-rescued-off-third-vessel-attacked-near-oman-mea-confirms-strike-by-us-navy#:~:text=Omanian) (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0269857905800115).
:::::To conclude, I hope you can understand that demonyms don't need to follow usual conventions and rules and improper usage doesn't change that. Limegreencoral (talk) 01:02, 12 June 2026 (UTC)
::::::Firstly, I thought I was supposed to write a reply and then edit the page, rather than write a reply, wait for a response, and then edit the page. I apologize for that.
::::::Secondly, yes, I concede that simply being in a dictionary is not enough for a demonym to be added to a page. That is why my latest edit on Somalia ↗ included a Reuters video from less than a week ago that had "Somalian" in the title. In fact, there are two separate videos by Reuters with "Somalian" in the title; they were both published in June 2026 (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/CyulegC6hwI, https://www.youtube.com/shorts/rUww9PMN2Rw). NBC News (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoFf4FR7PHw), The Hill (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8MY_12kmu4), Forbes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpG4gORXrHY, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcUzwMmY7UI, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCXZLuR7D1g), and ABC News (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EN-OHyP0UFs) also used it in titles. There are not fringe sources, they're listed as reliable on Wikipedia's guidelines.
::::::Most of your examples lack any robust sources that use the term beyond dictionary entries. Moreover, if we go past mainstream news articles, the fact that the US President Donald Trump uses the term (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkrQ_X6nlFI&t=26s) and the fact that UK politician Rupert Lowe uses the term (https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/2059312745141481631) should indicate that it is a widely used term. If that's somehow not enough, political commentators Matt Walsh (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtRfBn5zmms&t=2s) and LibsOfTikTok (https://x.com/search?q=from%3A%40libsoftiktok%20somalian&src=typed_query&f=top) also use the term, especially when speaking. The term "Somalian", unlike your other examples, is not merely a dictionary term that has not been used for 100 years, but rather a term that is arguably spoken more than "Somali" by politicians in the US and UK. CerealContainer (talk) 16:03, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::::{{reply to|CerealContainer}} I included other examples besides just dictionary sources. I made sure to show examples of different sources using wrong demonyms to show that it doesn't change what is correct. I showed that even government organizations like the UN along with other media sources can time to time use the wrong demonyms. Since you pointed out a lack of sources outside of dictionaries, let's look at Slovakia ↗, one of the countries I listed above as an example. The correct demonym for the people of Slovakia is 'Slovak', but nonetheless the term 'Slovakian' is sometimes wrongly used.
:::::::The NYT just posted an article the day before using that term (https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7357087/2026/06/13/yaya-toure-slovan-bratislava-man-city)
:::::::Another news article posted the day before (https://www.wionews.com/videos/g-7-summit-2026-pm-modi-to-meet-slovakian-pm-and-president-1781374350113)
:::::::Recent Telegraph article (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/05/30/minister-dined-putin-mouthpiece-secret-china-trip
:::::::Politico article (https://www.politico.eu/article/slovakian-bank-governor-kazimir-convicted-bribery-embarrassment-ecb/)
:::::::AP News article (https://apnews.com/article/slovakia-protests-fico-russia-703f111db728ecb9a890b7bd52f25a99)
:::::::Article posted today (https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/pm-modi-receives-traditional-slovakian-welcome-lauds-rich-cultural-heritage/articleshow/131732508.cms)
:::::::The Finnish government also used the term in their publication (https://valtioneuvosto.fi/en/-/slovakian-minister-of-foreign-affairs-juraj-blanar-to-visit-finland)
:::::::Even a recent press briefing from the EU commission uses the term (https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_26_759)
:::::::A US government statement from last month also does (https://www.justice.gov/usao-edmo/pr/slovakian-administrator-darknet-market-sold-drugs-and-stolen-personal-information)
:::::::Reuters used the term in the beginning of a recent article as well (https://www.reuters.com/world/slovakia-national-security-adviser-resigns-over-epstein-files-denies-wrongdoing-2026-02-01/#:~:text=Slovakian)
:::::::Recent video sources from media of different countries using the term (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ee6wTM6z0iY) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNFE3cUXhOg) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KBvQ_RndFo) (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZnQMdfVdII)
:::::::This is a timestamped video from a recent NATO Parliamentary Assembly meeting where the President uses the term (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqOcgRIubfA&t=4192s)
:::::::Even published scholarly articles outside of the media have used the term in recent years (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14782804.2024.2401868#:~:text=macroeconomic%20progress%2C%20many-,Slovakians,-feel%20the%20personal) (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13604813.2024.2315883#d1e617:~:text=Slovakian)
:::::::All of this to show that even with the usage of 'Slovakian', the correct demonym is still 'Slovak'.
:::::::Moreover, the term 'Somalian' has explicitly been mentioned as being an improper term.
:::::::The Cultural Atlas ↗, an educational resource developed with Australian government agencies says <blockquote>"The word “Somali” is used to refer to something of, from or related to the country of Somalia, as well as the majority ethnic group and language. Do not use the word “Somalian” to describe the country or people, as this is an inaccurate demonym invented by the West."</blockquote>
:::::::The APStylebook also says this (https://x.com/APStylebook/status/776505681037975556). Limegreencoral (talk) 05:30, 15 June 2026 (UTC)
::::::::First of all, even if you disagree with me on what is correct and incorrect, saying "the incorrect" about the term Somalian in the Wikipedia article on Somalia smuggles in an opinion which reputable sources don't follow, which violates NPOV. It also fails to be descriptive, as you are implying that the Somalians have a "correct" preference. Saying that they prefer the term Somali over Somalian is fine, but saying that they prefer it over "the incorrect" term Somalian is an NPOV violation as it does more than simply stating the facts.
::::::::Secondly, if all of those sources use Slovakian, then yes. There's a good case to be made that Slovakian should be added as a demonym on the Wikipedia article for Slovakia. Just like how the Wikipedia article on Argentina includes multiple demonyms due to multiple reputable news articles using Argentine and Argentinian, adding Slovakian to the Wikipedia article on Slovakia would be appropriate. CerealContainer (talk) 00:52, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::{{reply to|CerealContainer}} The reason I added in a source was to back up the statement so it wasn't baseless. Nonetheless, it could be more neutral, so I've included "may be viewed". Emphasis on the 'may' part as that is non-definitive language allowing for differing perspectives and adheres to a NPOV.
:::::::::I also added an explanatory note similar to the Afghanistan ↗ article that says the Somalian demonym has also been used, as well as citing a source for its use and linking to the etymology section for a further explanation. I think this is a good compromise for the two differing opinions regarding whether or not it should be added into the infobox.
:::::::::In the meantime, if you feel that you still disagree, before editing the infobox I would suggest creating a talk page discussion on the article to get the opinions of other editors in gaining a consensus (see WP:SEEKHELP ↗). This is generally the first course of action in a dispute resolution and where to start. Usually active editors can offer their input. If no one responds after a bit, for a small disagreement like this, a third opinion would be good (see WP:3O ↗).
:::::::::As the article stands now, I think it's pretty neutral and balances both sides and I don't have any problems with it. I will continue editing the page, but not the infobox until a consensus is reached. Hopefully the current inclusion satisfies both views. Limegreencoral (talk) 08:01, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
::::::::::I saw the added neutrality of the "Somalis prefer Somali over Somalian" paragraph. That new paragraph is significantly better and adheres to NPOV, so I don't have a problem with it.
::::::::::Regarding the infobox, I think that the current compromise is fine right now, though I might criticize it later if more reputable sources keep using the term "Somalian". In that case, I will go to the Somalia talk page first before changing it. CerealContainer (talk) 18:08, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, stop reverting my sourced content on the somali pages

This goes against Wikipedia rules and I will be pushed to report you if you keep on blanking my sourced content or get into edit warring territory. Wikipedia is not a personal blog where sources dont matter or history.My edit is fully sourced per WP:V ↗. Your personal attachment to a topic doesnt give you the rights to clear sourced edits if users without valid reason. Edit warring is not permitted. Also see, WP:EW ↗, WP:NPOV ↗,WP:NOR ↗. Dolpina (talk) 08:31, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

:There is no edit warring. What you're adding to the articles I reverted is not what the sources you cited say. Limegreencoral (talk) 09:10, 12 January 2026 (UTC)
::Read the sources I cited. That was what was said. Dolpina (talk) 09:45, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

{{You've got mail}}

Johannes Klarnus-Pettersen (talk) 18:14, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

:{{reply to|Johannes Klarnus-Pettersen}} Hello, I just saw this. I'll check it. Limegreencoral (talk) 06:03, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Dispute resolution noticeboard

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

62px|left ↗
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard ↗ regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The discussion is about the topic :Ethiopian–Adal War ↗.
Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! {{clear}}
Habeshakira (talk) 18:56, 9 July 2026 (UTC)