User talk:Bosomba Amosah

Bosomba Amosah, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Bosomba Amosah! 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 experienced editors like Lectonar (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:12, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Image tagging for File:Tanoboase Sacred grove and rock formation.png

Thanks for uploading File:Tanoboase Sacred grove and rock formation.png. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:30, 31 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Bosomba Amosah, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Bono East Region 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. — Diannaa (talk) 21:02, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bono people, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gold Coast (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:50, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

edit-warring

Please read WP:RS and WP:TRUTH. It doesn't matter what you know to be true, you need to demonstrate it. For linguistic claims, you need linguistic sources, not newspaper articles or random websites. Also, when multiple contemporary sources agree, they trump old sources. The consensus today appears to be that Bono and Wasa are distinct languages, though close to Akan. If you want to claim that Bono is a dialect of Akan, you need modern, reliable sources that are sufficient to rebuke sources such as Glottolog and Ethnologue. Those latter sources could easily be wrong, but you need to demonstrate that they're wrong so that other people can confirm what you claim. Other people do not share your personal knowledge. — kwami (talk) 08:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have read all the rules and guidelines and do understand. Ethnologue and Glottolog can’t be the only benchmark sources, neither can it trump the works of Prof Florence Abena Dolphyne because it appears to be earlier date. Daily graphic is reliable source. How can Bono be Akan and not speak Akan, what is your definition of Akan and its composition, I need clarification on your claim. It is also true Bono, Fante and Wasa are mutually intelligible, how then do your source exclude Bono from Akan. Does that means your sources could be wrong, or it has been fed with wrong information. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 10:51, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sources can be wrong, which is why we go by a consensus of sources. Secondary and review sources generally have priority.

You're confusing ethnicity with language. Some Akan speak English as their native tongue. That doesn't make English a dialect of Akan.

Daily Graphic is not a reliable source for linguistic claims, per the guidelines I provided you.

Many people use the word 'dialect' for all languages spoken by a particular ethnic group. For example, Zhuang has historically been called a 'dialect' of Chinese, even though it's not in the same language family, because the Zhuang historically identified as Chinese. Similarly with the Bangime 'dialect' of Dogon, which isn't in the same language family despite the Bangime being ethnically Dogon. You yourself appear to be such a person, with your rhetorical question 'How can Bono be Akan and not speak Akan.' The fact that you would ask that question indicates that you do not know what a dialect is.

As for intelligibility, there is the complicating factor of acquired bilingualism. The fact that the Bono understand Akan does not mean the languages are mutually intelligible, because Bono have extensive exposure to Akan. You would need a source that the Ashanti etc. readily understand Bono. Ethnologue has a note that Bono and Wasa have limited intelligibility, but make no mention of Akan proper.

Also, please post in a single location, rather than duplicating threads. — kwami (talk) 01:06, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s good you admitted sources can be wrong, just like ethnologue and Glottolog could be wrong. I understand ethnicity and language very well, you are rather resorting to red herring. Akan could be a language or people, just like Akan language or Akan people. No Akan in Ghana or Côte d’Ivoire speaks English as their native language unless it’s being termed as official language which is understandable. English is just L2 for Akan especially Ghanaians.

You are rather confusing language with dialect. English is a language with dialects(sub) from America, UK etc whereas Akan is a language with dialects from Bono, Fante, Akuapem, Asante etc. So Bono is a dialect, not a language, that’s the category; therefore Glottolog and Ethnologue could be wrong. Linguistic sources from Prof Abena Dolphyne, Bureau of Languages Ghana, Ghana Bible Society confirm my stance. Therefore if you suggest Bono is a language, then where are the dialects of Bono? Because language is a broad term for language family. Your examples deviate from the context, your examples aren’t from the same language family but historically.

To say Bono isn’t Akan means you don’t understand the whole concept, or your sources could be wrong. Bono is Akan and there is nothing like Bono being exposed to Akan, that’s wrong. The fact that you are alluding “You would need a source that the Ashanti” understand Bono means you are confusing yourself. Ashanti is not a yardstick for Akan languages, that’s ridiculous. Kindly explain “Akan” and “Akan proper” for my perusal, you seem to be mentioning words which aren’t understandable. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 17:29, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not all Akan live in Ghana and Ivory Coast.

You're using circular logic: It's true, therefore it's true. And no, you obviously don't understand the connection between ethnicity and language. Fortunately, we rely on WP:RS, not on WP:TRUTH.

I used 'Akan proper' because of your argument that Bono is Akan.

What does Dolphyne actually say about Bono? — kwami (talk) 19:03, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No Akan elsewhere uses English as a native language unless official language. You are confusing yourself. It’s obvious you also don’t understand Akan with respect to Ethnicity and language. I’m relying on WP:RS hence quoting Abena Dolphyne. I want explanation of your claim “ Akan proper” and “Akan” and its composition. Dolphyne explains Bono dialect is a parental Akan language which contains the characteristics of the dialects of Fante, Wasa, Asante, Akuapem etc. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 13:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because you have a different definition of the Akan language than contemporary sources do, I used 'Akan proper' for the Akan of ethnologue, glottologue etc. because it would be silly to relate Bono to Akan if Bono were Akan.

In your summary, you say Bono is both a dialect and a language. Not very helpful. Also, it's rather ridiculous to claim that a modern language is the ancestor of another modern language. That would be like saying Italian is parental to French because it's more conservative. — kwami (talk) 19:42, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere did I say Bono is both dialect and language, don’t put words in my mouth. Bono is a dialect of Akan language. Your sources could be wrong on the definition of Akan, it is likewise improper to say some Akan are proper Akan without giving a vivid explanation than relying on information from Ethnologue and Glottolog which could be wrong. You need to be clear on what “proper Akan” else it’s ridiculous. It is very ridiculous to segregate some dialects and term it proper Akan in this modern era. Contemporary sources relate to Prof Abena Dolphyne. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 08:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't appear to be reading what you're responding to. — kwami (talk) 09:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've closed the move request, based on Dolphyne and Stewart agreeing that Bono is a dialect of Akan. However, it is not Twi - Dolphine 1986 p.15 says that it is close to Wasa, but that Asante and Fante are closer to each other than they are to Bono, and moreover that Twi does not exist. — kwami (talk) 05:22, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noted for closing the request, however Bono is Twi. Dolphyne’s introduction says Asante and Bono geographically close and understand each other well. Dolphyne’s work was more on Akan as whole. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 19:13, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dolphyne says that Twi has no linguistic meaning. It's just a synonym for 'Akan' that is not used by Fante. She is your only reliable source. — kwami (talk) 19:17, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Where did Dolphyne says that, cite the page, want to check. Then don’t conclude Bono is not Twi because it is. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 09:34, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Top p. 15, tree diagram.

Okay, Bono is Twi. But then what is Twi? If Twi is a language, then Fante is also Twi. But that's obsolete terminology. In this century Fante is no longer considered to be Twi. — kwami (talk) 09:50, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no tree diagram in my document(pdf), so you can WhatsApp your document to me on 055 755 0978. Twi is a language spoken by Bono, Asante, Akwamu, Akuapem, Akyem etc. Fante is not part. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 19:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

here's the link.[1] — kwami (talk) 21:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The table was explaining Proto Tano languages and make no mention of your claim. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 08:13, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It shows that Fante is closest to Akuapem. If Twi includes Asante and Akuapem, then it also includes Fante. If it doesn't include Fante, then it doesn't include Akuapem -- or Bono, for that matter. — kwami (talk) 11:06, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Then are you also trying to imply Twi is Akuapem and Fante since it’s closest, without Asante. Is that the logic…? Fante isn’t Twi. The table was explaining Proto Tano languages and its categorisation. It’s a broad topic there Bosomba Amosah (talk) 12:37, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not implying anything. I was explaining the tree to you. If Twi is a linguistic entity, you need to ask where it is on the tree. If you circle the things that are Twi, you don't get a coherent clade. Thus Twi is not a linguistic entity -- which is presumably why it's not listed anywhere. Ergo it is not a language and not a dialect. It's a label that may refer to some ethnic or other factor, but it would not appear in a list of Akan dialects. Linguistically, it has no meaning. — kwami (talk) 13:22, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The tree was more about Proto Tano languages and made no reservations for Twi language. Whatever it is, some Akan people have accepted it as their mother tongue from onset whether it’s a language or not. It includes subdialects of Akuapem, Denkyira, Akwamu, Asante, Bono, Akyem… It appears exclusively to Akan in southern and central Ghana except Fante. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 14:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

okay, fine. i'm only saying that it has no linguistic meaning and so has no place in the Akan article apart from identity and terminology. we shouldn't treat it as a language. comments like 'bono is a dialect of twi' are meaningless. it's like saying 'akan is a dialect of ghanaian.' — kwami (talk) 22:07, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Twi is for Bono, Akuapem, Asante, Akyem, Akwamu, Denkyira etc whether as language or identity. It is not limited to Akuapem and Asante only, however it would be better to say Akuapem and Asante were the first to be developed in written forms. The same way comments like Akuapem or Asante is a dialect of Twi are meaningless, if Bono is meaningless. Your example “Akan is a dialect of Ghanaian” is out context and proportion. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 20:34, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming expiry of your ipblock-exempt right

Hi, this is an automated reminder as part of Global reminder bot to let you know that your WP:IPBE right which gave you the ability to bypass IP address blocks will expire on 10:37, 18 November 2024 (UTC). If your IP is still blocked (which you can test by trying to edit when logged-out), please renew by following the instructions at the IPBE page; otherwise, you do not need to do anything. To opt out of user right expiry notifications, add yourself to m:Global reminder bot/Exclusion. Leaderbot (talk) 11:09, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

official language

can you provide your reference for bono being an official language of ghana? — kwami (talk) 02:17, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have not made a statement pertaining to Bono being official language of Ghana. My statement is English is the official language of Ghana. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 08:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, you claimed that Bono is official.[2][3][4] I'll go ahead and revert you. — kwami (talk) 17:27, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

adding bullshit

Please stop adding bullshit to the akan articles. Some of your edits you know to be nonsense, as it's contradicted by your own sources, and some is unsubstantiated [such as bono being one of the traditional literary varieties of akan]. — kwami (talk) 04:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop removing relevant information from Twi. It’s just vandalism. Nothing is contradictory, stop confusing yourself. Bono is one of the varieties of Akan, hence stop removing Bono from the article. That’s unwarranted. You started removing Bono from the article [[5]] Bosomba Amosah (talk) 20:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remember, any unsourced claims can be deleted at any time.

First you insisted that Bono was a dialect of Akan, now you insist that it's a language. You provided the source that Twi has no linguistic meaning, yet you're still pushing it as a genealogical node. You also repeatedly claim that it's one of the founding literary dialects of Twi/Akan, but the sources you provide fail -- or at least I can't find any support in them. If you do have a source for that, please provide a page number so we can verify. — kwami (talk) 11:23, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My stance is on your continuance removal of Bono from Twi, because it is part of Twi. Yes, Bono is a dialect just as Fante or Akuampem or Asante. Nowhere have I stated Bono is a language, the context is on Twi, don’t switch it to a different topic. You reiterated severally that Twi has no linguistic meaning, neither is it a language or dialect, it is not my saying, that’s your stance. Do not put words in my mouth. My stance is Twi encompasses Akuapem, Akyem, Bono, Akwamu, Asante, Denkyira etc.

Twi is Twi and Akan is Akan. They are not the same. Akan comprises of Fante, Asante, Akuapem, Bono, Wassa.

Read [[6]] You are confusing Twi with Akan, they are not the same. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 12:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

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 do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

I never said Akan and Twi are the same thing. Just the opposite in fact. And I never said it was your position that Twi is not a dialect. Again, just the opposite. You cite Dolphyne, Ethnologue etc. in your edits, but when I check them I find that they don't say what you claim they do. In other words, you appear to be using citations falsely to make it look like your personal opinions are supported by the lit.

If you dispute Dolphyne, your own source that I've been basing my edits on, you can get a wp:third opinion. If you continue to falsify sources instead, pushing your opinions instead of following what the sources say, I will report you for edit-warring and ask that your account be blocked.

I'm happy to follow other wp:reliable sources if you can find them. You need reliable sources for at least two things - one, that Dolphyne is wrong about the relationship among Akan dialects, and two, that Bono is one of the literary languages that constitute Twi.

If you can prove that Dolphyne is wrong, than we need to remove her from the articles, which means following other sources that Bono is a distinct language. If you want to use Dolphyne, then we need to accept her classification, which means that Twi is not a dialect. You can't have it both ways.

For all I know Bono may be one of the literary dialects of Akan. I've never seen that, however, and so will continue to revert that claim until you provide a reliable source that it's true. — kwami (talk) 21:13, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are equally engaging in edit wars as your edits are assumption based and could lead to reporting, not reflecting the works of Prof Dolphyne or any reliable. I will correct any edits which have no reliable source rather than assumptions. You edits are based on assumptions, secondary, you are using Akan reference on Ethnologue as Twi reference, this means you are assuming Twi and Akan are the same which is not. Dolphyne’s works include Bono as Akan, nowhere did she stated it is not Twi either. Dolphyne works centered on Proto Tano languages, further breaking it into “Akan” and “Anyi-Baoule-Nzema” languages. Nowhere did it mention Twi as you assuming and prolly the supposed classification. You are not following WP:RS else you might cite sources to support your claims. Continuously changing edits with different sources could lead to falsification, and consequently breaking the three revert rules could lead to your account being block. I have been waiting to see you provide reliable source which saids Bono is not Twi, yet none is being provided. Instead you are using Akan reference as Twi and making assumptions which Dolphyne never stated. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 11:38, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the Bono people article, rather than reverting you, I added 'fix' tags to the gibberish that you keep adding. If you can find a source for any of it, great, but I doubt you can find a source that their language is called 'Bono Twi of Akan', that 'Bono' and 'Twi' are synonyms [which of course would mean that Asante is not Twi], that the Fante and Akwamu are not Akan, or that 'owning to' means anything. Though I suspect that you will deny that you wrote any of those things. — kwami (talk) 11:55, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not saying Bono is synonymous to Twi, I mean Bono Twi. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 12:19, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, other editors have thanked me for reverting your edits. — kwami (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And stop posting bullshit on my talk page. — kwami (talk) 11:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 2024

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Bono dialect. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Austronesier (talk) 09:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noted for the alert, his edits are equally engaging in edit wars as it is based on assumptions. Preferably the talk page is better. One editor Kwami is using Akan reference as Twi as seen here [[7]] on [[8]]. He is mixing Twi with Akan as they are not the same. Prof Dolphyne worked extensively on Akan as seen here[[9]]. The diagram was explaining Proto Tano languages further breaking it down into Akan, and Any-Baoule-Nzema languages. Nowhere did she touched or mentioned Twi as it has been assumed by Kwami. It was purely on the individual elements of Akan language. His edits must cite on Twi and not just based on pre-sumptions from the diagram which never touched on Twi. Another one of her works on Akan here(p.88)[[10]] contributed to Bono dialect and other Akan dialects, once again it never touched on Twi. So, on what basis did Kwami arrive at the hasty conclusion on Twi without even citing a single source on Twi. There is no problem on what Twi is, whether a language or dialect or none of them or as a label. However his consistent removal of Bono from Twi elements. Because Twi entails Akuapem, Bono(Brong), Akyem, Akwamu,Kwahu, Denkyira as seen here [[11]] and [[12]]. Therefore my contention is not on identity of Twi but his continual exclusion of Bono from Twi elements as seen in his edits [[13]]. Check in between his edits. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 10:48, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm Austronesier. Your recent edit(s) to the page Asante dialect appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Austronesier (talk) 22:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be specific: you have added a claim to various articles that Bono is a literary variety of Akan without a supporting source. The reference that you have pasted to that claim does not support it at all. Stop this. –Austronesier (talk) 22:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per RS as shared, Bono is literaly variety of Akan Bosomba Amosah (talk) 18:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The information on Asante dialect is already correct as it appears one editor wants to remove Bono from it. I will add it because it already has RS Bosomba Amosah (talk) 18:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My addition to the dialects is on Twi and the various elements. As seen here [[14]] and [[15]] Bosomba Amosah (talk) 19:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Fante dialect. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please 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, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Austronesier (talk) 20:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of the three sources mentions Bono among the literary varieties of Akan. Also, Omniglot is not a RS (which in any case does not support the claim of Bono being a literary variant either). –Austronesier (talk) 20:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On Twi: you claim omniglot is not RS. However these are [[16]] and [[17]]. There is therefore no need to revert my edits on Twi. As Twi entails Akuapem, Asante, Akyem, Bono, Kwahu, Denkyira etc. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 14:00, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't address your unsupported changes. You have changed e.g.

Fante (Fanti: [ˈfɑnti]), also known as Fanti, Fantse, or Mfantse, is one of the three literary dialects of the Akan language, along with Asante and Akuapem...

to

Fante (Fanti: [ˈfɑnti]), also known as Fanti, Fantse, or Mfantse, is one of the three literary dialects of the Akan language, along with Bono, Asante and Akuapem...

which means that you a) have added Bono to the list of literary dialects of Akan and b) haven't even counted right (with the unsourced inclusion of Bono, it makes four literary dialect). It is sufficiently problematic that you repeatedly add unsourced text to multiple article; but with your incapability to recognize it and address the issue when someone specifically points it out it you, it puts into question your overall competence for editing WP. –Austronesier (talk) 12:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seen. Yet let me be specific here, my issue is on Twi article as I have stipulated earlier. No need reverting my edits as Twi entails Akuapem, Asante, Akyem, Bono, Kwahu, Denkyira etc. Bosomba Amosah (talk) 20:24, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]