Talk:Popobawa

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Tanzania portal This article is supported by WikiProject Tanzania (assessed as Low-importance).

Folklore Low‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Folklore, a WikiProject dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the topics of folklore and folklore studies. If you would like to participate, you may edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project's page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dubious

This article should not be written as a fact. — Kieff | Talk 05:26, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)

It does sound quite peculiar. Has anyone else heard of this "Popobawa" creature? In any case, it should clearly be written to state that while a small number of people may believe in this "demon," it's existence is far from proven.

MSTCrow 11:58, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)

I heard of it in an issue of The Economist sometime last year where they were describing how it is connected to political turmoil in Zanzibar and using it as a metaphor. While obviously a rational person has to doubt the existence of a creature, the phenomenon is real. And so if stated clearly as a legend the factualness of this article shouldn't be any more under question than those of Greek gods, Chupacabra, or the Yetti. Guest - Jordan March 10, 2005

Personally, this sounds like a pile of bullshit. Really, it could be just established as a folklore story.--Keyzersoze 16:52, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Merging

Not knowing this article already existed, I created Popo Bawa today and then found this article. IMHO, the new one is better written (this one has POV and cleanup tags everywhere) and the new one already has other current contributors. I've taken any information from this one, and I'm turning it into a redirect to the new article. SchmuckyTheCat 03:52, 17 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Recent upsurge

There is another upsurge in activity [1] (Emperor 03:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Removed paragraph

Villagers maintain that Popobawa becomes enraged if his existence is denied. It is said{{Fact}} Popobawa spoke to the villagers in 1971 through a girl possessed by the monster. The girl, called Fatuma, spoke in a man's deep voice and then villagers say they heard the sound of a car revving and rustling on a nearby roof. Many of those on the islands believe in exorcisms, and place charms at the base of fig trees or sacrifice goats.

I removed the above paragraph, which has been tagged with {{fact}} since February. If anybody can find a citation for this material, then I'm sure it will have a place in the article; until then, I don't think we need it. -GTBacchus^(talk) 05:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, SchmuckyTheCat replaced the paragraph, adding a citation to "Reuters, May 16, 2005". I don't get it. How am I supposed to see this reference? Is it online, or what? -GTBacchus^(talk) 12:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reuters is a major journalism feed. An archive of their feeds will pop up the story. Google will find unauthorized reproductions: [2]. SchmuckyTheCat 14:39, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I knew who Reuters is, but I didn't know how to find the actual story. It's too bad we can't send readers there more directly. -GTBacchus^(talk) 14:50, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to link to unauthorized reproductions, obviously. SchmuckyTheCat 14:58, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously. :) It's still too bad. The easier we can make verification, the better. -GTBacchus^(talk) 01:47, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no reason that a source has to be online to be used (or most books would be ruled out). That said, as Reuter's syndicate their content it must be on a reliable source site. Anyway I have found it on the Web Archive cache of the news story here and they are a legitimate organisation and it is a cached version of page used as a source by Harper's Magazine online [3]. So even if the original report isn't online anymore we can verify that it did exist which should make it fine to use. (Emperor 02:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I'm not questioning whether it's fine to use; it's just nice when sources are easily accessible online and we can link to them. That's all. -GTBacchus^(talk) 03:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Popobawa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061211015310/http://www.forteantimes.com/articles/086_batman.shtml to http://www.forteantimes.com/articles/086_batman.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:26, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]