User talk:Ikpe

Nomination of Evading Justice - Perjury as a related offence for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Evading Justice - Perjury as a related offence is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evading Justice - Perjury as a related offence until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Prioryman (talk) 09:13, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Murder

I have deleted Offence of Murder: A Critic of the Law and Principles and e-mailed you the text. Please publish this on your own or the university's website. And the word is critique not critic! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 17:26, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the mail below which is my paper I sent to wikipedia for publication. Kindly let me know whether what I need to do with the paper is with the footnoting. Thanks immensely. — Ikpe (talk · contribs) via e-mail

No it was not the footnotes - though the footnote numbers give us a very strong clue that this text has already been published and was rather crudely copied here. Did you actually look at the AfD discussion about your other article? Both articles were simple violations of our original research rule. I repeat: please publish your essays elsewhere - and when you do, break up the text with section headings! A solid, unrelieved slab of text is totally off-putting. As to Wikipedia, have a look at category:Nigerian law. You could probably make some useful contributions there. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:59, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your mail. Truly, the paper is the product of my research effort. All sources used in the paper were duly acknowledged. It is not a copy and paste paper. However, I have submitted the paper titled Offence of Murder: A Critique of the Law and Principles to Wikipedia Nigeria as you advised. I am very grateful. — Ikpe (talk · contribs) via e-mail

I most certainly never advised you to submit anything to "Wikipedia Nigeria" and in any case what on earth is Wikipedia Nigeria? When I say "elsewhere" I mean nowhere near any Wikipedia. It is just possible that Wikibooks might accept your submission but do not be too hopeful. I have blocked you for a week for blatantly reposting your perjury article in the face of this unambiguous AfD decision and for vandalising two category pages - you may still edit this page. I suggest that you do not post anything to Wikipedia without receiving confirmation from an experienced editor. Here are some names that spring to mind: Jimfbleak (talk · contribs), Neutrality (talk · contribs), Tom Morris (talk · contribs) and, of course, myself. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 20:46, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Block

Do you really think that this edit serves any useful purpose. Please reply. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:15, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 01:08, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen your comment, I'm away for a day or so, will respond then Jimfbleak - talk to me? 04:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~~~~. If you post your revised version here, and let me know, I'll take a look Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:09, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback

Hi, you can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~~~~. As it stands, your article is completely unacceptable for the following reasons.

The article was obviously copied verbatim from somewhere else, and may be a copyright violation. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright isn't sufficient.

If the article has been published elsewhere, you need to tell us so we can check that the publisher has released it under a public domain licence
If it has not been published, please note that we do not accept personal essays or original research

It did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts or show that it meets the notability guidelines.
You have an obvious conflict of interest when it comes to editing articles about this subject. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your article is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you can post a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.
Please note that anyone can edit any article, so your name should not appear as the author in article space

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:05, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jim, why do you think it is a copyvio? I am perfectly prepared to accept that it is Ikpe's own work. COI also seems a strange argument: given his position, Ikpe should be an ideal person to contribute to the subject of Nigerian law here - if he could be persuaded to conform to our standards intead of dumping large slabs of original reasearch. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:57, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Suleiman, I challenge you to carry out the following exercise: look at three articles in category:Nigerian law or its sub categories; read each article carefully; list the articles here and for each one tell us either "it is perfect" or describe the improvements you would make to it. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:10, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Challenge response

Dear Mr Haworth

Re Suleiman - challenge

these are my comments in respect of the articles on Nigerian law that I examined.

Advance-fee fraud

This is an analytical exposition, and from the way the author sounded it seems he had once been a victim of scam or he got his information first hand from a victim of fraudulent transactions involving Nigerian scammers. The word ‘419’ used by the author to explain the nature of the scam examined originally referred to section 419 of the Nigerian Criminal Code dealing with obtaining goods by false pretences. Although section 419 appeared in the footnote of the article the section was not properly examined to show that the word is used in reference to a section prohibiting the offence of obtaining by false pretences.

The author did not highlight the fact that due to the prominence of the offence which became an index with which Nigeria’s personality was defined globally constrained the Nigerian Legislature to enact an Act – Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act, 2006 which prohibits both the offences of obtaining property by false pretences and money laundering which enhanced the punishment to a term not more than 20 years and not less than 7 years without option of fine, as against the 3 years and 7 years imprisonment depending on the amount involved in the scam under the Criminal Code. This would have brought to the fore the efforts of the Nigerian government to curtail the menace of the offence.

The above would have led the author to examine the nexus between the offence of obtaining by false pretences and money laundering because those who obtain funds through such scams tend to disguise the nature, source and the origin of such funds by investing them in seemingly legitimate businesses. This would have had the effect of educating victims that they can trace their funds to such businesses.

The author also talked about ‘alert officials’ when it dawns on any victim that he has been duped. But he failed to mention the officials. These are the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC); the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA); and the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). These are bodies charged with the responsibilities of monitoring all financial transactions in order to put any account under surveillance so as to trace the owners of any lodgment in a bank account. In fact section 12 of the Foreign Exchange (Monitoring and Miscellaneous Provision) Act 1995 empowers the Nigerian Customs Service to report any transactions to or from a foreign country made pursuant to this law when the funds or securities involves a sum greater than $10, 000.00. This is useful piece of information so that victims know where to run to in distressed periods.

The author should have used the appropriate words used for obtaining by false pretences in South Africa in the case of one Mr Osamai Hiromi, a Japanese business man lured to Johannesburg, South Africa by scammers instead of using 419scam a term popularly used in Nigeria to refer to the offence of obtaining goods by false pretences under section 419 of the Criminal Code and now under Part 1 of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act, 2006.

The author examined the offence of kidnapping and, it is submitted that that did not derail the focus of the offence because in some cases the con men do lure their victims to their home countries who are eventually kidnapped and killed. On the whole the article is informative and educative as, it is a wake up call to users of the Internet and mobile phones to be wary of the email messages and text massages which offers them mouth watering deals. — Dr Suleiman Oji, Esq

This is an analytical exposition, and from the way the author sounded it seems he had once been a victim of scam or he got his information first hand from a victim of fraudulent transactions involving Nigerian scammers. The word ‘419’ used by the author to explain the nature of the scam examined originally referred to section 419 of the Nigerian Criminal Code dealing with obtaining goods by false pretences. Although section 419 appeared in the footnote of the article the section was not properly examined to show that the word is used in reference to a section prohibiting the offence of obtaining by false pretences.

The author did not highlight the fact that due to the prominence of the offence which became an index with which Nigeria’s personality was defined globally constrained the Nigerian Legislature to enact an Act – Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act, 2006 which prohibits both the offences of obtaining property by false pretences and money laundering which enhanced the punishment to a term not more than 20 years and not less than 7 years without option of fine, as against the 3 years and 7 years imprisonment depending on the amount involved in the scam under the Criminal Code. This would have brought to the fore the efforts of the Nigerian government to curtail the menace of the offence.

The above would have led the author to examine the nexus between the offence of obtaining by false pretences and money laundering because those who obtain funds through such scams tend to disguise the nature, source and the origin of such funds by investing them in seemingly legitimate businesses. This would have had the effect of educating victims that they can trace their funds to such businesses.

The author also talked about ‘alert officials’ when it dawns on any victim that he has been duped. But he failed to mention the officials. These are the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC); the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA); and the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). These are bodies charged with the responsibilities of monitoring all financial transactions in order to put any account under surveillance so as to trace the owners of any lodgment in a bank account. In fact section 12 of the Foreign Exchange (Monitoring and Miscellaneous Provision) Act 1995 empowers the Nigerian Customs Service to report any transactions to or from a foreign country made pursuant to this law when the funds or securities involves a sum greater than $10, 000.00. This is useful piece of information so that victims know where to run to in distressed periods.

The author should have used the appropriate words used for obtaining by false pretences in South Africa in the case of one Mr Osamai Hiromi, a Japanese business man lured to Johannesburg, South Africa by scammers instead of using 419scam a term popularly used in Nigeria to refer to the offence of obtaining goods by false pretences under section 419 of the Criminal Code and now under Part 1 of the Advance Fee Fraud and other Related Offences Act, 2006.

The author examined the offence of kidnapping and, it is submitted that that did not derail the focus of the offence because in some cases the con men do lure their victims to their home countries who are eventually kidnapped and killed. On the whole the article is informative and educative as, it is a wake up call to users of the Internet and mobile phones to be wary of the email messages and text massages which offers them mouth watering deals. Ikpe 04:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC) Dr Suleiman Oji, Esq

Polygamy in Nasarawa State

The author of this article is not fair to the people of Nasarawa State of Nigeria. It is true that the state is composed of both Christians and Muslims but some of the Christians when it comes to marriage can elect to marry under their native law and custom which permits polygamy. This is the practice in Nigeria because there are a host of authorities that have declared church blessed marriages and not being a statutory marriage which prohibits polygamy. Equally the Muslim in Nasarawa State does not need any legislation to pratice polygamy because it is a marriage practice found in the Holy Quran. It is also true that in Nasarawa State there are practitioners of indigenous religion which does not limit the number of wives a man could have. However the language presentation of the article is good but the idea it tends to convey lacks objectivity. It is bais. Ikpe 04:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC) Dr Suleiman Oji, Esq

Independent Corrupt Practices Commission

The article is perfect. Ikpe 04:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC) Dr Suleiman Oji, Esq

Thank you very much. When you contribute to talk and user_talk pages, always sign using ~~~~. On article pages you never sign - authorship is found from the edit history. This edit was simply not needed. This edit was in the wrong place. Please copy it to Talk:Polygamy in Nasarawa State. That article looked reasonably objective to me but if you don't like it, why not improve it? In your discussion (which needs tidied up to remove duplication) of advance-fee fraud you keep saying "the author". This highlights your basic misconception of Wikipedia: it is not a place for essays. Have you actually looked at how many people have contributed to advance-fee fraud?

Now that I know that you have looked at some articles, I can ask the next and most important question: what do you think are the significant differences between the essays you keep submitting and a proper Wikipedia article?

You have submitted this to Wikiversity where it has remained untouched since Sept 9 and you have submitted this and this to newarticle.com where they are similarly unmolested. So why do you keep trying to submit to Wikipedia where your most recent submission was deleted within 11 minutes? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 09:52, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of An analysis of some related offences afecting the administration justice under nigerian law

The article An analysis of some related offences afecting the administration justice under nigerian law has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

WP:Essay / WP:OR

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Toddst1 (talk) 05:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC) == Hello Suleiman,[reply]

I want to encourage you to improve Perjury in Nigeria into a better article. The purpose if Wikipedia is to inform the reader. But it is not to present new concepts or persuade someone. For the topic "Perjury in Nigeria" are there areas that your article does not cover, eg famous cases, controversies? Also the references seem to have been lost. I can see numbers for footnotes scattered through, but no foot notes to match. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 03:51, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Perjury in Nigeria

Hello, Ikpe, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia!

I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you worked on, Perjury in Nigeria, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:

edit the page
remove the text that looks like this: {{proposed deletion/dated...}}
save the page

It helps to explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the Help Desk. Thanks again for contributing! — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 23:56, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perjury

The AfD tag on Perjury in Nigeria is only to be removed by the admin who closes the AfD discussion. Please also note that we do not SHOUT and we do not sign articles. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:01, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr Haworth,

Thanks. Your comments and advice are noted. 41.206.15.52 (talk) 08:09, 11 November 2011 (UTC) Dr S Oji[reply]