Talk:Yoruba people

Days to days from journalism and investigation Rap i find informations that explain black Africans unity ( structured ) from the old time as one people in differents branchs ( nower days ). Yoroba language is the mixing of Ewe language and fon language. And fon language is the mixing of Ewe language and the Yewe language (ancestors religion ). Kotafon, Guin, mina, Adja are also from the great race Ewe who is more that ewe ethnic group. Komavo wednesday, 29 may 2024, 6:18am.

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the article, the Ijebu Kingdom is wrongly referred to as city-states although it was actually a Nigerian traditional kingdom that was centered around the capital of Ijebu Ode. Although it was compiled of multiple areas and cities, they were just as united as any other kingdom. 2601:283:C283:6670:ED6B:84FA:E697:683F (talk) 02:21, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 06:45, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Ijebu of Yorubaland: The Political Economy of a Yoruba Kingdom (1892–1940) by I. A. Akinjogbin

Kingdoms of the Yoruba by Robert Smith

2601:283:C283:6670:B5AE:E453:F6B4:D394 (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Can this page be back under semi protection. The recent activities in the page history is concerning. Dolpina (talk) 11:35, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

Yoruba is one of the major tribes in Nigeria, and they don't have a flag it is misinformation to add a flag to the article Funtiberry (talk) 03:35, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Yorubas are an ethnic group native to Yorubaland in west africa, not just Nigeria. The Yoruba people have an ethnic flag. Dolpina (talk) 14:11, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Itsekiriwriting and that ip address have been edit warring in the page history of reason for what I cant see as a good reason but page disruption. Dolpina (talk) 11:34, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

Please stop restoring material that presents the Itsekiri as a Yoruba subgroup, their language as merely a Yoruba dialect, or their territory as part of Yorubaland as reliable sources do not support those claims. Please review WP:RSAGE, WP:V.

“Yoruboid”, “Yoruba-speaking”, or historically connected to Yoruba does not automatically mean ethnically Yoruba. Making that jump is synthesis (WP:SYNTH). Disputed claims must also be directly supported by the cited sources (WP:V, WP:PROVEIT). Please discuss here if any questions instead of continuing the revert cycle (WP:EW). Itsekiriwriting (talk) 15:41, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

On my last edit summary, I want to further clarify that Yoruboid is not the same thing as Yoruba. Yoruboid refers to a language group, which contains separate languages. These include, Yoruba, Igala, and Itsekiri. Therefore, it is a misrepresentation of the source to treat Yoruba which is a branch of Yoruboid as though it were equivalent to it. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 00:34, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Itsekiriwriting, thank you for the further clarification.

I agree that Yoruboid is a language group containing the separate languages Yoruba, Itsekiri and Igala, and that Yoruba should not be treated as equivalent to Yoruboid. However, the text that was removed did not make that equation. The actual wording was:

the Yoruboid languages, and in particular the Edekiri subgroup, are a closed group of mutually intelligible dialects which strongly bind their speakers into the same linguistic community. This dialectal area spans ... to the lands of the Itsekiri people...

It never stated that Itsekiri is a dialect of Yoruba or that the Itsekiri people are Yoruba. The edit summary therefore did not accurately describe what the text said. For that reason, and because the undo also removed a substantial amount of sourced material that is relevant to the linguistic discussion (including the Kluge 2008 study of the Ede continuum and related references), I have reverted the edit. A more precise version that keeps the standard classification (separate languages within Yoruboid/Edekiri) while noting the close relationship is of course welcome. Agents47 (talk) 15:03, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Edekiri is not a group of dialects. It is a language subgroup containing distinct languages, including Itsekiri and Ede. Ede is the dialect continuum described in the source; Itsekiri is not part of that continuum. Therefore, describing Edekiri as “a closed group of mutually intelligible dialects”, amounts to describing Itsekiri as a dialect and, misrepresents the source.

Your edit is therefore insufficient and should be reverted. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 15:34, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

So which proves another point it is a single wording that needs to be corrected that does not justify removing the other sourced material that was removed along with it. we can reword that specific sentence while retaining the material that is properly supported. Agents47 (talk) 15:59, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

The images are not properly supported. I have already described how the “Yorubaland” is a misrepresentation of Bascom’s image. You still have not addressed the copyright violation, as well, instead you are complaining my messages are “too long”. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 16:29, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

There is no copyright violation. Yet I will let an admin determine that. All issues you have raised have been addressed and now you’re finding more reasons for the material to be deleted. I think we need to wait for admin to decide because the back and forth won’t produce anything. Agents47 (talk) 16:48, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

You have not provided how the copyright permissions are received for a work labeled as “own work” on Commons yet you say there no copyright violations. You have not given any valid defense for any of the concerns I raised, by the way. Also, please do not assume motive for my actions or I will report you for conduct. Simply address the issues raised or leave it to other editors. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 16:54, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

The image is not a copy of Bascom’s original map. It is an original illustration created by the uploader, with Bascom cited as the source for the information represented in it. So the relevant question is whether the illustration itself improperly reproduces protected elements of Bascom’s work, not simply whether Bascom’s book is copyrighted. That is what I will leave the admins to determine. Agents47 (talk) 17:08, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

If you now claim that the map is not a copy/reproduction of Bascom’s map, then Bascom can only be cited for information that his work actually supports. The source does not support the geographical representation shown in this map, therefore the map should be removed. If a map accurately representing Bascom’s classification is included instead, then Bascom’s treatment of the Itsekiri as a Yoruba subgroup must be explicitly presented as Bascom’s view, and the majority scholarly position that treats the Itsekiri as a distinct ethnic group must be explained and given more weight, per WP:NPOV, WP:DUE, and WP:UNDUE

Please actually review these three rules I’ve cited above before responding to me. Otherwise, there is no point. These are all things I’ve mentioned before but you’ve refused to take your time and read them at once. Instead, you want me to reiterate them to you in separate messages. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 17:55, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

The “Degree of Presence…” map literally labels within “Indigenous Yoruba Presence in Nigeria, Benin and Togo”. It then includes Delta state which most likely means it counts the Itsekiri as Yoruba. Now, this map is own work and has no sources that substantiate it. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 16:37, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

There are two or three Yoruba/Yoruboid groups in Delta State, including Ilaje, Itsekiri and Olukumi, and there are sources for this. So the statement is not simply unsupported because you disagree with the classification. If you believe the wording is inaccurate, it should be discussed and reworded based on the sources rather than removed outright and described as unsupported. Agents47 (talk) 16:52, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

I think we have been over this. Yoruboid is not Yoruba. Yoruboid is a language group containing various languages. The map labels “Yoruba”. Itsekiri is not Yoruba, and therefore their presence should not be accounted in such a map. Ilaje and Olukumi presence in Delta state is far too small to justify the degree of presence claimed in that map. Furthermore, it is not simply about me disagreeing with the classification. “Own work” needs to be substantiated by reliable sources. None of your sources substantiate the statistics labeled in that map. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 17:11, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

I will not continue going back and forth on this. From my understanding, the original issue was what Bascom’s work actually says, and the other material that was removed also has sources supporting it, even if those sources do not agree with your interpretation. I do not want to accuse you of having a particular motive, but across several related articles I have noticed a repeated focus on removing or changing material that connects Itsekiri and Yoruba, including material that has cited sources. At this point, I think it is better for other uninvolved editors to review the sources and the disputed material rather than for us to keep going back and forth. Agents47 (talk) 17:26, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Tracing the editing history, the motive is actually very explicit. Not an accusation at this point.

The Itsekiri have been described as either Yoruba, 'Yoruba offshoots' or a 'Yoruba sub-group' in many academic sources, which I dan't find necessary listing here at this point in time.... But for example HERE where Itsekiri were clearly enumerated as a group inhabiting Southeastern YORUBALAND, or HERE. The Itsekiri are clearly a derived group... Not sure why it is even an issue in contention. Oramfe (talk) 17:56, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Can you explicitly say what my alleged “motive” is?

To address your points, no one is claiming that there are no sources which describe the Itsekiri as Yoruba or a Yoruba offshoot. There is, however, a much broader body of scholarship treating the Itsekiri as a distinct ethnic group, including P. C. Lloyd, Moore, Obaro Ikime, Kathy Curnow, Thomas Imobighe, Oti Ayenbi, Ese Anibor and others. Lloyd’s work treats the Itsekiri as a people in their own right; Ikime’s scholarship treats Itsekiri and Urhobo as distinct peoples in intergroup relations; Curnow treats Itsekiri culture as a distinct Niger Delta culture; Ayenbi treats Itsekiri as a minority language community; and Anibor’s published work expressly refers to the “Itsekiri ethnic group.”

All of these makes the article’s present stance that Itsekiri is a Yoruba subgroup, a contested view. And as a result, it must be qualified as such and greater weight must be given to the majority scholarly view per WP:NPOV, WP:DUE and WP:UNDUE. Specifically, if Bascom’s map or a map based on his is included, his classification of the Itsekiri as Yoruba cannot be presented as an established fact in Wikipedia’s voice. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 18:38, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

To add to the last part: “Specifically, if Bascom’s map or a map based on his is included, his classification of the Itsekiri as Yoruba cannot be presented as an established fact in Wikipedia’s voice.” The majority scholarly treatment of the Itsekiri as a distinct ethnic group must also be explained and given greater weight. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 18:39, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

I think I have explained that the sources are not representing your claims enough. The next step is to have a formal review on these articles and the disputes.

On your other comment, I’ve rewritten an entire article on the Itsekiri people. The fact that the only changes you noticed are the removal of incorrect statements about the connection to the Yoruba people, does not say anything about me. This is Wikipedia, everyone can review my edits and see what they were, as well as confirm it with the source material. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 18:02, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

What you have done to the Itsekiri article isn't a simple 'rewriting', you have removed complete sections of verifiable information including first hand observational accounts from the ethnography section in the name of re-writing. So, yes it does say something about your motive, if not what it is not, surely on what it is.

So yes, you can request formal reviews, but pending those, the articles will remain in their longer standing and stable versions before your disruptions commenced. Oramfe (talk) 18:07, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

You can go to the Itsekiri article talk page and proof the “verifiable”, relevant information that were removed. Another editor was asked to do so multiple times but ignored the request. Let’s keep this talk page on the subject at hand. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 18:10, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

We've raised this issue here before but I'm opening a separate topic as an attempt to deal with it specifically.

The statement that “the Edekiri subgroup” consists of “a closed group of mutually intelligible dialects” is not supported by a citation and contradicts specialist linguistic literature. Edekiri is a language subgroup containing distinct languages; it is not simply a collection of Yoruba dialects. Akinkugbe (1976), in An Internal Classification of the Yoruboid Group (Yoruba, Isekiri, Igala), explicitly states that “The languages in this group are Yoruba, Isekiri and Igala”, distinguishing Itsekiri from Yoruba rather than classifying it as a Yoruba dialect. Akinkugbe’s subsequent 1978 doctoral study is titled A Comparative Phonology of Yoruba (Dialects), Itsekiri and Igala, explicitly distinguishing Yoruba dialects from Itsekiri and Igala. More recently, Ayenbi’s 2024 doctoral thesis in linguistics, Endangered minority language: a case study of the Itsekiri language in Nigeria, likewise treats Itsekiri as a language in its own right. The present wording therefore reduces distinct Edekiri languages into “dialects” and then describes the entire area from Ana-Ife to Itsekiri territory as one “dialectal area”. I propose removing this paragraph unless a specialist linguistic source can be provided that specifically supports these claims. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 14:11, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

I would like other editors to look at the following paragraph in the “Group identity” section:

Linguistically, the Yoruboid languages, and in particular the Edekiri subgroup, are a closed group of mutually intelligible dialects which strongly bind their speakers into the same linguistic community. This dialectal area spans from the lands of the Ana-Ife people in central Togo and eastern Ghana eastwards to the lands of the Itsekiri people in the western Niger Delta around the Formosa (Benin) and Escravos river estuaries.

Yoruboid and Edekiri are language classifications. They do not make everyone within them a Yoruba-speaker or of the Yoruba ethnic group. Itsekiri is a separate language spoken by a separate ethnic group. Kluge, which the article cites, separates Isekiri from Ede (Yoruba) within Edekiri and also says that lexical similarity alone does not prove mutual intelligibility. Furthermore, I do not understand why in a section about the Yoruba group identity, another ethnic group is even being discussed, simply because they utilize a related language.

There's a similar outlandish error in the “Degree of Presence” map. It labels Yoruba an “important minority” in Delta State without providing a source. It appears to reach that figure by taking the Itsekiri presence in Delta state and identifying it as Yoruba.

I'm asking for the map to be removed and the statement about the Itsekiri in the group identity section, also to be removed.

@Kwesi Yema, Theguycalledrae, Mathglot, Cnilep, Austronesier, Kowal2701, and Vanderwaalforces: Oramfe and I have already discussed this and could not reach a consensus. I would really appreciate it if you all could provide your independent views. Thanks. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 13:07, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

My only contribution is that I believe the Yoruba are an important minority in Delta State. The Olukumi people, an apparent subgroup of the Yoruba, are one of the inhabitants of the state, so I think a classification the Yoruba ranging from "significant minority" to "smaller but visible minority" is all in all accurate. The Itsekiri on the other hand seem to have a larger population there than that. Theguycalledrae (talk) 14:17, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your contribution. Please view the actual map contained in the article, I only gave a summary of the issue here. Yes, Olukumi may be considered an important minority in Delta state but that is not primarily the issue. The map places the Yoruba “indigenous” presence in Delta state at around 10%. The Olukumi population plainly does not account to a figure of that scale, so what reliable demographic source supports it? Itsekiriwriting (talk) 14:25, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Okay I see. Well, that's an issue but do you think the map should be removed entirely or just edited to correct that? The licence allows to transform or build upon the material provided there's appropriate attribution. Do you have the means or the willingness to edit the map? If you can then I suggest you go ahead and if not I could figure out something or get in touch with someone who can. What do you think? Theguycalledrae (talk) 14:47, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. I do not know how to edit the map but I think it should be removed entirely for now. Delta is not the only issue, the map gives all these percentages without saying where they came from, so there is no real basis for deciding how it should be edited. A properly sourced map can always be added later. Itsekiriwriting (talk) 14:54, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

i guess that makes sense. However, I just checked and I saw that the map was added by @Oramfe. I'm sure they probably won't agree with the decision to remove the map entirely and they might have a logical reason for that. Also, there appears to be a few citations in the caption. I haven't gone through them to see if they're reliable or if the map accurately portrays the information on them but I will as soon as I have the chance. For now I think we should just wait for the opinions of others and reach a consensus so this won't ignite an edit war. Theguycalledrae (talk) 15:04, 28 August 2026 (UTC)