This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Ethiopia C‑class Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethiopia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ethiopia 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.EthiopiaWikipedia:WikiProject EthiopiaTemplate:WikiProject EthiopiaEthiopia articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Africa: Ethiopia C‑class Top‑importance 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 C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Ethiopia (assessed as Top-importance). Ethnic groups C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities 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.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Archives

1, 2, 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

I removed the following statement (originally posted by 62.252.224.12) due to POV:

The Amhara are known for their beauty, as exemplified by the supermodel Liya Kebede.

As for the example of Liya Kebede, that article is already categorized under Category:Ethiopian models, which is more properly NPOV. I've made an attempt at re-wording it in this article. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 01:42, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Dear wikipedians, the picture on the article page which represents the Amhara is old and very out-dated. Are there not more accurate and more current pictures which depict the Amhara people than this? Can you please get some newer, more current pictures please? -Kim

Yes i could upload a picture of a an Amhara women, could i do that?Abel Mesganaw (talk) 05:28, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch, Levine is alluding to the battle captives from other local Afro-Asiatic-speaking noble groups. The perception, capture, treatment and duties of these related peoples was completely different from that of the unrelated Shanqella. This is explained here. Soupforone (talk) 03:53, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Soupforone: Not quite. It is broader. The exact quote is self-explanatory. Have you checked the page 57 of Abir by the way? I see the Nilotic etc part in the other wikipedia article, but I don't see the support on page 57 of Abir. Do you have another source, or page number? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 04:03, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Levine indicates that most slaves were drawn from the Sudanic tribes (i.e., Nilotic). These groups are locally known as the Shanqella/barya. This is why "barya" is also the term for slave in Amharic [1]. Soupforone (talk) 05:05, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Abel Gebremariam: please don't repeatedly remove the "refimprove-section" tag, as you did here, without adding sources that support everything in the first and second paragraph of this section. Alternatively please delete the unsourced paragraphs and sentences, then remove the tag. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:59, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello moderators,

Social stratification is highlighted in the Amhara people page, but i noticed that the sources are not correct/false or at least questionable.

Source 35. Leads to a title but no article ^[1]

Source 37. Leads to a Cambridge site with no mention of Amhara or any other ethnic group ref>Teshale Tibebu (1995). The Making of Modern Ethiopia: 1896-1974. The Red Sea Press. pp. 67–70. ISBN 978-1-56902-001-2.</ref> whereas others such as the historian David Todd assert that this system can be unequivocally labelled as caste-based.^[2]

Source 38. Leads to a Cambridge site with an article that mentions Ham and negroid but no Amhara or any other ethnic group specifically ^[3]

Source 39. Leads to an article which mentions Qemant, Eritreans and Beta Israel but no mention of Amhara ^[4]

The topic in itself no longer applies to current Ethiopia since slavery is abolished in 1942 ^[5]

With so many questionable sources, i can't help but think that someone wants to put a negative light on this page. Mankind throughout history has practiced slavery and serfdom, why does it need to be highlighted on the Amhara page? Why with incorrect sources. It would otherwise only be fair if it's highlighted on every ethnic group and nations wikipedia pages, from medieval Europe to African states, the same way it's highlightend on the Amhara page(with incorrect sources)

I hereby request you to consider the removal of that section.

Thank you and have good day 86.89.46.70 (talk) 03:36, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The statistics bureau you mentioned doesnt necessarily mean millions were killed but they could of chose to identify with another ethnic group. Oromos were known to pose as Amhara and have now stopped due to the Oromia region being granted. Duqsene (talk) 01:12, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@86.89.46.70: Donald Levine's text is scholarly and well cited, and other sources in that section are WP:RS. The section stays. Please note that WP:COMPETENCE is required, or you should not be editing wikipedia. If you need help with finding sources, please contact WP:TEAHOUSE. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:25, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch: Have you seen the alleged sources provided above? Many of those sources lead to nothing or doesn't mention Amhara, don't you find that questionable? In what way do you question my WP:COMPETENCE? At least you can do is to check on those sources. I'm going to contact other administrators and users on this issue to look at those sources. Any other users who want to check on the sources feel free to do so.86.89.46.70 (talk) 14:09, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim1138:: Hello Jim, can i ask your assistance in this? There was a new section added on the Amhara people page, but many of those sources leads to nothing or doesn't mention Amhara, can you look in to this? Thank you 86.89.46.70 (talk) 14:22, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@86.89.46.70: I have checked them. These and Donald Levine do discuss Amhara and social stratification (slavery, castes) on the page numbers cited in the article. Older October 2016 versions of this article, quoted the source, then embedded quotes in the cite from the source for easier verifiability, but later editing by others (@Soupforone e.g.) reworded and removed the quotes. Is your concern with edits of @Soupforone?

You lecture, "i can't help but think that someone wants to put a negative light on this page. Mankind throughout history has practiced slavery and serfdom, why does it need to be highlighted on the Amhara page?" Wikipedia articles are not a public relations portal/blog to put positive or negative light. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and notable encyclopedic information from multiple reliable secondary and tertiary sources about the history, society etc of Amhara people belongs in this article. Please see WP:COMPREHENSIVE. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 14:36, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The ip indicates that the social stratification material in general is dubious (which you originally added, not me). He/she does not ask to spam more WP:REDFLAG claims, but on the contrary asks for its complete removal. Soupforone (talk) 15:41, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Soupforone: Donald Levine is not a dubious source, but one of the most respected, cited Ethiopian studies scholar. Nor are other sources dubious, they are scholarly. Since you edited the article here and added content citing support from multiple sources, I presume you are confident that your edits were sourced. Or, did you just makes changes to the wording and added text to the Social Stratification section in October without checking what the sources were stating? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:47, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I tried to neutralize the social stratification material (which you originally added) as best I could. However, given the ip's complaints above, that clearly was not enough. He/she wants the entire section removed, as he/she believes that "someone wants to put a negative light on this page". Therefore, per WP:BRD, please do not append any material until this stratification thing with the ip is sorted out. Soupforone (talk) 16:02, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Soupforone: You revised the section to "neutralize" the wording in October without checking what the sources are actually stating? NPOV is with respect to the sources, not with respect to your personal feelings/ opinions/ wisdom/ prejudices. Let me invite admin @Doug Weller: please guide us on content rules, in this other important Ethiopia-related article. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:12, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I actually did verify Levine, but that's not really the main issue here. The ip is claiming that much of the material is WP:UNDUE and WP:REDFLAG (e.g. that Afars routinely enslaved Amhara), and that it was appended out of bad faith (i.e. WP:ATTACK). Perhaps Duqsene and EthiopianHabesha can provide clarification on this. Soupforone (talk) 16:22, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Soupforone: If you did verify the source, then you answered the IP's verifiability concerns. You misunderstand both WP:UNDUE and WP:REDFLAG. The lead sentence of WP:UNDUE states, "Neutrality requires that each article or other page in the mainspace fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint in the published, reliable sources." Different forms of social stratification among the Amhara people is a significant viewpoint and Donald Levine book published by University of Chicago Press is a prominent, high quality reliable source. On REDFLAG's requirement that the content cite multiple high quality sources, please note you have in past removed second/third sources claiming WP:CITEKILL. More importantly, the relevant section of this article already cites multiple high quality sources. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(ps) WP:ATTACK is for dedicated pages primarily disparaging a subject and are unsourced or poorly sourced, and such articles are subject to speedy-delete. It does not apply here. WP:ATTACK does not mean we suppress all slavery-related / women's abuse / discrimination / social stratification / etc sections in articles of wikipedia. Please see WP:COMPREHENSIVE. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:56, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's frankly not surprising that the ip should have trouble WP:VERifying some of the phrases given the WP:CITEKILL ("a good rule of thumb is that, except for certain controversial topics, one footnote after a sentence is almost always sufficient"). When the ip writes above that "with so many questionable sources, i can't help but think that someone wants to put a negative light on this page", he/she means that WP:BLP has likely been breached (you're right though about WP:ATTACK; it's apparently BLP that applies here-- "Editors must take particular care when adding information about living persons to any Wikipedia page. Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity, and must adhere strictly to all applicable laws in the United States, to this policy, and to Wikipedia's three core content policies: Neutral point of view (NPOV) Verifiability (V) No original research (NOR)... This policy applies to... material about living persons in other articles and on other pages, including talk pages".). Likewise, when the ip indicates that "I hereby request you to consider the removal of that section", he/she indeed means that the stratification stuff is WP:UNDUE. This seems fairly straightforward. Soupforone (talk) 03:58, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch and@Soupforone You said that the sources are reliable, including those mentioned above. That's why i asked @Jim1138: and i would encourage other admins and users to check on those links(sources). Let's start by breaking it down one by one, and i will wait for your reply source by source, and i hope the admins will look into this, source by source. The first one Abir, Mordechai (1968). Ethiopia: the era of the princes: the challenge of Islam and re-unification of the Christian Empire, 1769-1855 Praeger. p. 57. leads to a google books, with no acces to material to verify the source. ^[1] 86.89.46.70 (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@86.89.46.70: Go to a good library. Otherwise just WP:AGF for other editors, if you want others to assume good faith on your editing. Wikipedia requires verifiability, not solving your problems of "acces [sic] to material to verify the source". Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:10, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch If i can't access the source then it's only right to bring others into the equation to verify it for us. I asked @Jim1138: because he patrols recent changes. If he and others can't access the source(s) provided by you, then surely it's not only my problem. I'm willing to check it source by source and i hope you and others will join in. Starting with one Abir, Mordechai (1968). Ethiopia: the era of the princes: the challenge of Islam and re-unification of the Christian Empire, 1769-1855 Praeger. p. 57.^[2] 86.89.46.70 (talk) 17:25, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ip, I verified the Herbert Lewis work, and you're right. Amhara aren't mentioned in it. Soupforone (talk) 03:58, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have embedded a quote for easier verification. @Soupforone: The BLP does not apply here either (see your second longer comment above at 03:58, 9 January 2017 (UTC)). It does not for several reasons, in particular because the content is well sourced to multiple peer reviewed scholarly WP:RS. Your understanding of wikipedia policies lack far behind your willingness to invoke them. You first cite WP:ATTACK applies here, after my reply admit "you are right about WP:ATTACK", but now you allege WP:BLP applies here. You are wrong again. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 10:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@86.89.46.70: On Mordechai, see separate sub-section below. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, WP:BLPGROUP indicates that BLP could apply to groups, but this is subject to interpretation. Anyway, the embedded text is from Donald Levine rather than Herbert Lewis. It can't be from Herbert's work because, as the ip correctly indicates, he does not discuss Amhara therein. I'm not opposed to linking to Levine's paraphrase, but the ip therefore might. Soupforone (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Soupforone Thank you, i thought so the Herbert Lewis source is disputable Ms Sarah Welch Do you also dispute the source or are you seeing something with the Herbert Lewis link? 86.89.46.70 (talk) 16:59, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Soupforone (talk) 17:18, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My interpretation is that BLP does not apply here (if by that you mean to Amhara people as a population). The group is too big for it to apply, per WP:BLPGROUP. I was involved in a similar debate about Somalis in the UK some time ago and the consensus there was that BLP did not apply to such a group (and the Amhara are a much bigger group than Somalis in the UK). I can probably dig the discussion out if that would be helpful. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sjö If you look at 03:58, 9 January 2017 (UTC) Then you see that the Herbert Lewis source didn't mention Amhara, @ 10:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC) She embedded a quote for 'easier verification' and @ 16:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC) the embedded text didn't turned out to be from Herbert Lewis, but Donald Levine. After staunchly defending sources and claiming it to be quote well sourced to multiple peer reviewed scholarly WP:RS. Your understanding of wikipedia policies lack far behind your willingness to invoke themend quote' @ 10:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC). After that she quitely removed the Herbert Lewis source, my point is that people can claim misuse a hard to verify source, in this case it has been found out, but doesn't it put the neutrality of the editor who added the section into question? I can't use diffs yet, i don't know how, otherwise i would have put this on the noticeboard. Soupforone Can you look into this, do you know how to use the noticeboard?? Very sorry for the inconvience GabiloveAdol (talk) 19:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Slavery in Amhara society

@Soupforone: Why did you remove this section in October (I am bolding Amhara below to address some of the puzzling questions about verifiability above)...

According to Donald Levine – a professor of Sociology specializing in Ethiopian studies:[16]

Most Ethiopian societies have also distinguished two other status groups, slaves and caste groups. Slavery was widespread in Greater Ethiopia until the 1930s, and today ex-slaves, children of former slaves, and de facto slaves in some regions occupy social positions much like their predecessors'. (...) Between tribes, Borana made slaves of Konso, Afar made slaves of Amhara, Kefa made slaves of most of their neighboring tribesmen, and Amhara and Tigreans, while not supposed to enslave fellow Christians, had slaves from many non-Christian groups.

— Donald Levine, Greater Ethiopia: The Evolution of a Multiethnic Society[16]

I am surprised you also removed the shorter version, "According to Donald Levine, Amhara people at different periods of their history owned slaves from many groups, were enslaved by Afar people, and that "slavery was widespread in Greater Ethiopia until the 1930s, and today ex-slaves, children of former slaves, and de facto slaves in some regions occupy social positions much like their predecessors"". Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This page is on Amhara specifically. As such, the only phrases above that are not WP:OFFTOPIC are the claims that Afars enslaved Amhara and that Amhara had non-Christian slaves. The latter is noted. However, the claim that Afars enslaved Amhara is WP:REDFLAG. The ip is correct on that one. Soupforone (talk) 03:58, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The context is not offtopic, quoting in this case helps easy verification and keeps NPOV. That is, Amhara people were not the only ones enslaving other ethnic groups and creating social stratification. @Soupforone: you need to quit this REDFLAG, dubious etc allegations and OR. As @Buckshot06 notes, Donald Levine is WP:RS. The misstatement and repeated misuse of wikipedia policies is a problem with your edits in this and other related articles in Ethiopia, Somalia, Coastal East Africa, North Africa, etc. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 10:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

By WP:REDFLAG, what I obviously mean is that Levine's claim that the Afar enslaved the Amhara is a "claim[s] that [is] contradicted by the prevailing view within the relevant community". This is clear from John Ralph Willis' work, which explains that "with few exceptions, slavers were careful not to purchase Christian-Amhara or Tigrean slaves, nor did they purchase Muslim ones" [2]. Soupforone (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Soupforone: you misunderstand not only wiki policies such as WP:REDFLAG, but also Willis and Levine. The statement "slavers avoided purchasing Christian-Amhara slaves" does not necessarily contradict Levine's statement "Slaves were acquired by conquering other peoples, by taking captives in war, or in slave-rading expeditions. (...) Afar people made slaves of Amhara". Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:18, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It does because slave raids on the ruling Amhara by the Afar were virtually nil. Terence Walz et al. are even more explicit-- "it was not likely that Amhara themselves were enslaved in his day since they were the ruling ethnic (and mostly Christian) group in the Abyssinian highlands" [3]. Soupforone (talk) 17:27, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Soupforone: Willis is discussing slave merchants in Arabia and Persian gulf, while Walz and Cuno are discussing slavery and how "Galla/Oromo people were enslaved after slave raids" in the time of Ali Mubarak. It is WP:OR, particularly of WP:Synthesis variety, to allege "slave raids on the ruling Amhara by the Afar were virtually nil" through the history of Greater Ethiopia. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:04, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Soupforone that it would be inconceivable for Afar to raid Abyssinia, however Afar is synonym with Adal according to Abyssinians. This blurs the line between Adal Kingdom and the Afar ethnic group. Slaves would fall into the hands of traders and sold around the region, thus to imply slaves can be acquired only through warfare is incorrect. Amharas or any other members of ethnic groups living in poverty would sell their children into slavery, some kidnapped. Slavery after all was a business back then therefore Amhara slaves were found in the region up until the 19th century. The source added describing Mahfuz, (de facto leader of Adal) at the time invading Abyssinia and acquiring slaves is plausible. Modifying term Afar to Adal seems the better option, what do you think Ms Sarah Welch. Duqsene (talk) 03:03, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed Duqsene, Levine is in all likelihood alluding to expeditions in Amhara territory by the Adal Sultanate. He actually mentions these elsewhere [4]. Soupforone (talk) 03:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This source mentions successive Adal Sultans defeating Amhara commanders and capturing slaves in Bale [5] Duqsene (talk) 09:01, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Duqsene: Ethiopia is a beautiful country with a long complicated history, particularly along the borderlands of three major ethnic/religious groups. We need to stick with what the reliable scholarly sources are stating, and Donald Levine mentions Afar. We cannot remove Afar, but we can add Adal too. I like your suggestion, and like your link to Ulrich Braukämper. Let me read the section therein a bit, before adding in the Adal part. Thanks, Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 11:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Duqsene and GabiloveAdol, I've queried with the fringe specialists whether the Afar bit from Donald Levine is a tiny fringe claim. I don't see how it can't be since he is literally the only Ethiopianist/Orientalist scholar that makes this claim. He is indeed in all probability simply alluding to the Adal Sultanate, but we'll wait and see. Also, bear in mind guys that whichever administrator monitors this discussion is obliged to respect WP:INVOLVED, otherwise he/she is an involved administrator and can no longer use his/her administrative privileges. Soupforone (talk) 17:38, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ms Sarah Welch: I appreciate your effort in improving these neglected pages. We should stick with the encyclopedic format. On the Oromo page you added Afar were called Gala which is not what most reliable sources say. The Oromos are called Gala [6] and the Afar are called Adal [7] If we find sources saying otherwise its not notable enough to include. Levine's statement is comparing ethnic groups enslaving those of a different religion, but it will easily be taken out of context by readers. Several sources acknowledge Adal as synonym with Afar [8] [9] Duqsene (talk) 20:30, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If there is disagreement between sources, the usual compromise is just to report what each of the sources say, attributing the opinions to their authors. We don't have to make a judgement about which source is correct and express that as fact in Wikipedia's voice. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:41, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Duqsene: It is always a good idea to check and provide edit diffs before making accusations such as, "On the Oromo page you added Afar were....". It was @EthiopianHabesha who did, with this edit. I know the link between Afar and Adal. It is strange to state "Afar is synonymous with Adal", yet simultaneously suggest not to use the word Afar because it was not Afar, it was Adal who enslaved. Ignore @Soupforone and prentensive claims. We just need to stick to the wording used by "multiple high quality sources". I already am reading a few on Afar-Adal-Amhara, and will add/update when I am done reading. I concur with @Cordless Larry, on what to do if there is disagreement between sources. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:49, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Cordless Larry: If additional sources going in depth on the Amhara-Afar slave trade are added, thats a reasonable compromise as Ms Sarah seems confident in providing more citations. As a stand alone it shouldnt be used as stated by fringe experts [10] @Ms Sarah Welch: My apologies then, as you may know, I have been dealing with EthiopianHabesha's problematic edits on multiple pages. Regarding Afar, Adal at times is referred to as a geographical location alluding to Afar region and other muslim regions surrounding Abyssinia. Afar wasnt the only ethnic group to enslave the Amhara. Raids would be done with a coalition of ethnic groups outside the Abyssinian sphere (south and east). Adal Sultanate was a multi ethnic entity that eventually collapsed in the Afar state. Duqsene (talk) 22:01, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Duqsene: Indeed, multiple RS is the way to go. By Afar (Dankali) here, we mean the people in northeastern Ethiopia, southern Eritrea and Djibouti who formed a major part of Arab armies in the waves of wars against Orthodox Christians, the guides for Arab slavers, and such. See this. Adal Sultanate peaked centuries ago then fell apart. One of the fragments emerged ultimately as Sultanate of Aussa (Afar Sultanate, See Levine's 2012 paper, and by others). Long is the shadow of history. To sum it up in one or few sentences is our challenge. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 22:24, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mordechai Abir source

@Soupforone and @86.89.46.70: The first person to add the Mordechai Abir source was @Soupforone, with this edit on October 27 2016. Perhaps, they can provide a quote to back up the content they added? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 10:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Soupforone (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Soupforone Done what? The link still leads to nowhere, do you agree that the source is disputable? Ms Sarah Welch Do you see content relevant to the page with the link coupled to the Mordechai Abir source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.89.46.70 (talk) 16:51, 9 January 2017 86.89.46.70 (talk) 17:01, 9 January 2017 (UTC)(UTC)[reply]

In your comment above, you wrote that the Abir link leads to a title but no article. By this, I presume you mean that it doesn't point to an online url of the whole book. However, there is no such available online url afaik, so I linked to the next best thing. Soupforone (talk) 17:18, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Soupforone So there's no content or quote available from this link that can be applied to the page? Can this source then be regarded as a unreliable/disputable source? 86.89.46.70 (talk) 17:27, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is there for assertion on the difference in perception, treatment and duties of the plantation slaves vs. the companion slaves. Please see WP:PAYWALL on the url. Soupforone (talk) 17:33, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Soupforone I saw the WP:PAYWALL i have read it, and it states hard to acces sources doesn't have to be rejected, but others can acces it for you. Since it's the source you have provided, i assume you can acces it for us and provide the correct content or quote relevant to the page? 86.89.46.70 (talk) 17:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's embedded in the url; it's actually over several pages [11] [12]. Soupforone (talk) 03:18, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Soupforone It's neither in the two links, if you can't provide the content related to the subject(Amhara people) please say so! GabiloveAdol (talk) 02:58, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I only have library access so I can't link to the whole thing [13]. Soupforone (talk) 06:30, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Herbert Lewis source

Soupforone So we have 2 people disputing the Herbert Lewis source Ms Sarah Welch you embbed the text from Donald Levine instead of Herbert Lewis, was it a honest mistake? If not you said on (10:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)The BLP does not apply here either It does not for several reasons, in particular because the content is well sourced to multiple peer reviewed scholarly WP:RS. Your understanding of wikipedia policies lack far behind your willingness to invoke them. You first cite WP:ATTACK applies here, after my reply admit "you are right about WP:ATTACK", but now you allege WP:BLP applies here. You are wrong again.) ' Well you have 2 people who can't see the mentioning of Amhara in the Herbert Lewis source, so i would really like to see the well sourced content which is relevant to this page. @Jim1138: Can i ask you to check up on the source? It's being challenged and more eyes are welcome^[1]. Thank you! 86.89.46.70 (talk) 19:28, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@86.89.46.70: Please read the sentence in this article, where that Herbert Lewis source is cited. Then read the embedded quotes. See opening paragraph of the Herbert Lewis paper, then read the entire section that starts on page 508 and ends in the middle of page 511. Lewis mentions social stratification among Cushitic and Semitic groups on page 509. Lewis is not the only source there. We already have several other WP:RS. Lewis is just another well cited scholar, and adding his reference goes on to improve the balance in that section. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:19, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch Well i doesn't see any embedded quotes, the ones above at 10:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC) is when you embedded Donald Levine's text and not Herbert Lewis, in which you were called upon at 16:41, 9 January 2017(UTC) by Soupforone. I would love to see embedded quotes. Only page 504 is avaible for reading and there's no mention of Amharas, if this is a paid source WP:PAYWALL in which user has to rely on others to acces it for them, then by all means please provide the correct content or quote relevant to the page, which can also be verified by admins? I will also put this on the notice board and have them run through all the sources in that section. 86.89.46.70 (talk) 21:49, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

<Hello Admin! Can someone look at the new social stratification section and the questionable sources? When i asked the provider of the sources above, one used embedded quotes from another site and author. If the admin find the sources and the section questionable, would it be deleted? The controversial section is taking a very central place on the page. The Amhara page as a whole is going through a lot of edits in a very short time as we speak with a lot of (questionable) sources by the users above. I'm not very experienced with wikipedia, but i know i can look at a source and see that something is wrong. I also asked a recent change patroller, but so far no response, please may i have your assistance?>

--86.89.46.70 (talk) 23:46, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, admin @Buckshot06 is already watching this article, has provided inputs within the last 24 hours. The IP @86.89.46.70 has been disruptive in past atleast since October 2016, deleting sourced content and reliable scholarly sources, and a strange edit summary. @86.89.46.70: your recent questions have been answered above. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch That's because i'm not very active on wikipedia, however ever since those beginner mistakes a user Jim1138 reached out and showed the policies, i'm no expert but i do know how to open a link and go to a source, you added disputed sources and used another author quotes(Donald Levine) for another source(Herbert Lewis). The patroller, users or admins just need to take a look at the sources whether or not your sources are questionable. I see you removed the source number 38 which was that of Herbert Lewis and replaced it now with Donald Levine, was that done to confuse? Or to acknowledge that you provided a disputed source which led to nowhere? 86.89.46.70 (talk) 00:30, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I lost my edits but i was the iP my username is now GabiloveAdol, the admin, patroller and anyone else can respond to meGabiloveAdol (talk) 01:10, 10 January 2017 (UTC) Over the past 10 hours Ms Sarah Welch went on a editing spree on the Amhara page, with some more questionable sources, how can i let people(experienced users, admins) take a look at the page, whether it has improved or detoriated since her edits? GabiloveAdol (talk) 02:34, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@86.89.46.70/GabiloveAdol: Read the sections ("Kinship and marriage" and History) and the cited sources carefully. On your editing spree... you "questioned" sources in other sections of this talk page, alleged they do not support the content, confessed you didn't have access and weren't able to read them. The "spree" of edits embedded quotes from the WP:RS to help ease verification. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 11:31, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am an administrator, yes, I am watching this page, and yes I have noticed the recent edits by Ms Sarah Welch. They appear to be in line with our most recommended sources - third party, academic sources. I would encourage anyone who disputes them to follow up, either by requesting sources be provided to them by contacts with academic access, or by visiting their nearest academic library. Please also Assume Good Faith - some reliable sources may be replaced with other reliable sources for a host of reasons, including newer, better, material, reorganisation of the article, or because the source cited makes the argument flow better. Happy to respond to any further requests for clarification. Buckshot06 (talk) 13:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Soupforone: Your edit conflates language and people. Levine and others are discussing how the language evolved. We can add a summary style section on Amharic language. The history section should first cover the people. But you removed the relevant summary from Encyclopedia of Africa published by Oxford University Press and Encyclopedia Britannica, which are WP:RS. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 17:55, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Duqsene, others: can you please add a few WP:RS or clean up the Art, Agriculture and Cuisine sections of this article? It is entirely unsourced and needs copyediting. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 04:06, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Duqsene: With this edit, you mentioned with RS, "the Abyssinians are known as Amhara people mainly". At FTN forum, you first demanded "who, what, how etc details", but then expressed concerns with the mention of this and this sources in this article which discuss, among other things, the enslavement of Amhara-Christians / Abyssinians. For example:

Quote: "The slaves were brought by Dankali merchants from Shoa, and are all generally Christian Abyssinians obtained in the villages of Shoa by purchase or by stealing". (p. 69, there are more examples on that page and others)

As you know from our discussion on this talk page, Amhara and Afar are referred in the sources by different terms, the latter as Aussa, Danakil, Dankali (and according to you, "Afar is synonym with Adal according to Abyssinians"). If all these are synonyms, we should have no problem using either term. Please explain. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:07, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I dont see an issue with using the term Abyssinian on the article. If RS use the term Abyssinian, it should be used instead of Amhara even though these terms are considered synonym in the academic world. If sources however mention the Afar with no additional sources going in depth, it shouldnt be included rather the Adal references should be added. Another thing to note is that Afar is only synonym with Adal according to the Amhara/Abyssinians not necessarily to the academic world. Abyssinia/Adal are afterall political terms to describe the region. Stick with what the RS say, otherwise it should be omitted entirely. Hope thats clear. Duqsene (talk) 22:36, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch, no one can deny that every tribe have been sold by their neighbours and did sell their neighbours in the past. Even in Europe or in Africa everyone sold their neigbours. Issue is unbalanced information i.e. if you open a section here regarding to slavery then we need to open in all other Ethnicgroups article in Ethiopia be it Oromo, Afar, Somali, Tigray etc and discuss how slaves were treated within those ethnic-groups. Of the over 80 ethnicgroups of Ethiopia singling out Amhara and opening slavery section here is not fair if we are writing encyclopedia to inform but not to advocate. I have seen many European or African ethnicgroup articles and they do not have slavery section saying they have been sold by their neighbours and were selling their neighbours. In my opinion, instead of opening slavery or class section in every ethnicgroups article it is better to tell all slavery related stories in Slavery in Ethiopia with balanced information, presenting how slavery has been practiced in all tribes of Ethiopia equally, if necessary even by opening sections for each tribe there so that people get balanced information. — EthiopianHabesha (talk) 21:01, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@EthiopianHabesha: No one is singling out Amhara. We have had a similar discussion in Oromo people article, and admin @Doug Weller already clarified the wikipedia content guidelines and policies to you. Feel free to start similar sections for Afar, etc after [1] finding high quality sources, [2] summarizing and citing them. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:12, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal

I am proposing to open "Slavery within Amhara society" section in Slavery in Ethiopia article and move both sections found in here titled "Slavery" and "Social stratification" there. Does any one support this proposal? — EthiopianHabesha (talk) 21:33, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The small section in this article is summary style already. It can be expanded many fold if you read the sources. Perhaps you can copy content there, expand it and link it. But deleting the section(s) entirely from this article will be inconsistent with wikipedia content guidelines and disruptive. Slavery and social stratification has been a part of Amhara history, discussed in many peer reviewed scholarly secondary and tertiary sources, and deserves to be summarized here. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 22:25, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch, I am just proposing that it's better to discuss slavery related history in the article Slavery in Ethiopia by opening sections for each tribes even for Amhara. Based on the knowledge I got after reading several books it seems slavery is part of every ethnicgroups history. — EthiopianHabesha (talk) 11:59, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

EthiopianHabesha I agree with you, and if you know how do raise this issue in a noticeboard, please do, because i don't know how yet. GabiloveAdol (talk) 06:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GabiloveAdol, if more editors support the move then I hope Ms Sarah agrees with it, and if not probably we will take it to one of the noticeboards. — EthiopianHabesha (talk) 12:14, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@EthiopianHabesha: You suggesting delete this article? delete and move history into History of Ethiopia, delete and move culture into Culture of Ethiopia, etc.? for same reasons. You are welcome to take it to ANI/AN/other noticeboards. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:44, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

EthiopianHabesha Okay we are good to go.GabiloveAdol (talk) 12:50, 12 January 2017 (UTC) Ms Sarah Welch You can say what you want, but you used Donald Levine quotes in order to pass for the Herbert Lewis source, which you then deleted. You got caught redhanded after defending that source so hard. The proof is above, we can read it back if you want. It's just i don't know how to use the noticeboards otherwise i would have reported your ... back then. GabiloveAdol (talk) 12:56, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@GabiloveAdol: The Herbert Lewis source has been and is still there. Please avoid personal attacks and false accusations on article talk pages. See WP:TPNO and WP:TE. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch I'm not attacking i'm asking why you used another author and said it was Herbert Lewis? You got caught by two user at least, then you kept defending and said about embedded quotes which you never provided. The conversation is above, so it's not attacking when people can look up the facts. I just said if i could use the noticeboard, i will would have and your section would have been compromised anyway BTW if the source is still here, i would still like to see those quotes you never provided. GabiloveAdol (talk) 13:18, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't help if you either can't or simply refuse to read the article and cited sources carefully. We have WP:TLDR issues on this talk page. There is no need to respond to everything you keep repeating. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Sarah Welch Well by all means i would invite everyone to read back and look at your cited sources let's see how many of them would find it. I will respond, that's how i'm raised, it's the polite thing to do! GabiloveAdol (talk) 13:29, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please assume good faith here, GabiloveAdol. I'm not sure what you mean by "you used Donald Levine quotes in order to pass for the Herbert Lewis source", but please don't engage in personal attacks such as "you got caught redhanded". If you want to make a complaint against an editor, then the place to do so is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Back to the issue at hand, which is supposed to be EthiopianHabesha's proposal to move text out of the article, I don't see why this can't be covered in both articles. Perhaps you could explain your case in more detail, EthiopianHabesha? Cordless Larry (talk) 15:46, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@CL: See this. EthiopianHabesha left a "no problem with me" note on my talk page, on keeping the slavery section in this article. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 16:26, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@EthiopianHabesha:, as @Duqsene: and @GabiloveAdol: also note above, much of the slavery stuff indeed either has little to do with the Amhara or is undue. The Adal Sultanate expeditions and gifting that Richard Pankhurst [14] and Ulrich Braukämper [15] discuss were in various old provinces (Amhara, Shäwa, Fatagar Dawaro). Neither alludes to the Amhara specifically; the wikitext just extrapolates it to the Amhara, which is absurd since these old zones were inhabited by diverse peoples. The Abdussamad H. Ahmad work is on slave exports (i.e., not slaves within Amhara society), and it turns out that he actually indicates therein that "the principal sources of slaves, all of whom passed through Matamma, the inland port on the Ethio-Sudanese border, and Massawa and Tajura on the Red Sea, were the south-western parts of Ethiopia. Slaves came mainly from Kaffa, Maji, Gamu, Gimira, Gofa, Wallayta, Kullo and Konta" [16]. He only briefly mentions Amhara twice: once as slave buyers ("the Amhara buyers at Baso would decry the slave merchandise"), and as "occasional" boy and girl captives taken to the Massawa/Red Sea market. Terence Walz and Kenneth M. Cuno allude to Ottoman-era court records on Abyssinian slaves, and conclude that it is unlikely that these were Amhara since the latter governed the Abyssinian highlands and also frequently raided for slaves in other areas [17]. Donald Levine mentions in passing that Afars made slaves of Amhara (the only Ethiopianist scholar to make this claim), but he doesn't explain what historical texts this is based on. The claim has also just been identified as anecdotal by a fringe specialist [18]. Given all this, I think the slavery stuff should therefore be whittled down to its bare essentials and contextualized within the stratification area. EthiopianHabesha, could you present appropriate wording for this here on the talk page? Soupforone (talk) 16:57, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Soupforone: The sources discuss Amhara people, either as Amhara or as ruling Abyssinians, or equivalent. As @Duqsene states, ethnic groups of Ethiopia have been referred to with synonymous terms. The article's section does state Amhara province or Amhara people etc if the source states so, in the current version. To allege that Amhara people did not live in Amhara province in the past is your OR, or that the wars and seizure of people in Amhara region is irrelevant to the history of Amhara people is puzzling. The source is clearly stating Amhara boys and girls were seized, and so on, per the embedded quotes. You have yet to provide a single source that states Afar did not enslave Amhara and thereby challenge Donald Levine (your lecturing is irrelevant). You misrepresent Walz and Cuno above by generalizing their specific comment about 19th century (which this the article carefully summarizes). We need to stick to summarizing the high quality reliable sources, embed quotes in the cites, and keep close to the exact wording in the sources while avoiding Copyvio/Plag issues. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 18:18, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, neither Pankhurst nor Braukämper write anything about Adal expeditions against the Amhara. They instead allude to the old provinces of Shewa, Amhara, and so forth. Those were multi-ethnic zones, as Duqsene pointed out. Soupforone (talk) 06:23, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Soupforone, @Ms Sarah Welch, I have several sources stating all tribes (be it from the north or east, christian or Muslim) are enslaved in the past. Before the introduction of paid labour in 20th century that is how the Oromo, Amhara, Somali, Tigrayans, Welayta, Kafa, Hammar, Anywak etc rulling classes gather people to work for them in their farms, in their household or herd their cattle. The ethnicgroups with more people are the most slavers and with less populations are less slavers. Anyways, I am not going to argue on this issue. My issue has got to do with the importance of adding similar sections in here and all other ethnicgroup articles. If the importance is to inform wikipedia readers then I think it is better to discuss slavery related history in the region under slavery in Ethiopia article so that people get a well balanced and complete information. I do not think it is aproporiate for wikipedia readers to get unbalanced information and assume slavery is part of this and that ethnicgroups but it is not part of this and that ethnicgroups. — EthiopianHabesha (talk) 11:07, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

EthiopianHabesha I agree with you about moving it to the slavery in ethiopia article where all the ethnic groups involved are mentioned, instead of adding similar sections in all of the other ethnic groups article's,

Sjö I would like to have your take on this if i may. Don't you think that the slavery and social stratification sections takes disproportionately large section of the history section, and that wikipedia readers might get an unneutral or unbalanced information? Wouldn't it be better to move the sections to the slavery in Ethiopia article, where all ethnic groups involved are mentioned, instead of adding similar sections in all ethnic groups? GabiloveAdol (talk) 18:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

Slavery was fundamental to the social, political and economic order of the northern savanna, Ethiopia and the East African coast for several centuries before 1600.
– Paul E Lovejoy, Professor, York University, Canada Research Chair in African Diaspora History^[1]

Slavery is therefore a notable topic to Ethiopian ethnic groups. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:39, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Duqsene: How about we embed a "refn templated" note of clarification that Arabic history documents have referred to Afar as Danakil, while Somali people use the term Adal or Udali, with this (page 15) Oxford University Press published encyclopedia as source? Similarly we can add a note on Amhara - Abyssinian, etc. I see relevant sources, specific to slave kidnapping / seizing in and around Gondar and others during regional wars. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:53, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]