Talk:Hutu
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hutu article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"The latter view has received support among proponents of Rwandan national unity, but has been criticized as an attempt at historical revisionism"
[edit]How can you "criticize" something as "historical revisionism"? Historical revisionism is the act of looking at something from a different perspective. And this doesn't seem to refer to historical denialism, because the context seems to be a sort of Conflict rationalization of events. If the perspective were caused by denialism, it would deny the events of the genocide, not correctly place blame upon the perpetrators of racial dogma (Germans and Belgians). Also, there is no reference to revisionism in the two sources given. I'll temporarily remove the sentence until someone figures out what's being said here... --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 08:30, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
"Historical revisionism is the act of looking at something from a different perspective" -
No it doesn't. It means a particular thing and included in that definition is "Historical negationism". That is distortion of the historical record for ulterior reasons. It might have been more correct for the user to use the latter term, but the former is equally correct.
"not correctly place blame upon the perpetrators of racial dogma (Germans and Belgians"
The blame for the genocide is with those doing the killing. The ethnic groups existed previously and still exist to this day. Germany and Belgium are not responsible for the genocide - Africans are, specifically the Hutu's. Wikipedia is not the place for your opinion, just the facts.
Your contribution shows why it is important to enforce NPOV standards on this page. Tanila001 (talk) 18:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
NPOV (and indeed OR) violations
[edit]Two points.
1) "An alternate theory is that the Hutu and Tutsi originally belonged to the same Bantu population, but were artificially divided by German and then Belgian colonists so that the Tutsi minority could serve as local overseers for Berlin and Brussels"
One source cited is not a RS. Footnote 8 is a polemic against Europeans that has no supporting evidence, and is clearly wrong on several counts (DNA evidence, linguistic evidence) and is self published. It has no place in this article and I have removed it.
The other (7) does not make the claim it is being used to support. It states - "When the German and the Belgian colonizers came, Rwanda had one nation – one people sharing the same language, the same political system and the same religion." That does not mean "the people" were from the same ethnic group or had the same history, it means they were living in the same space at the same time under the same system. Many different ethnic groups do so in many parts of the world.
I am removing that sentence pending sources. The cattle division is not a source as it can be shown the they were distinct ethnic groups before Europeans arrived. While the Belgian action should be mentioned as affecting future events, it is irrelevant to the discussion on pre-European ethnicity.
In short, this entire article is a mess of NPOV and RS violations. If you were involved in its creation, please engage here and cite reasons for the inclusion of the tagged section, its contents and its sources. Tanila001 (talk) 15:52, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Once again removed the un-sourced opinion piece being offered as a plausible theory of origins. The link contains no evidence and is not relevant to a discussion on genetic ancestry. It is a polemic against racism. Nothing wrong with that, but it has no bearing on the discussion. Tanila001 (talk) 21:44, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Off topic and biaised
[edit]This article seems to be solely concerned with similarities, relationship and the distinction between Hutu and Tutsi instead of focusing on Hutu people and what is known about them as a people of the whole African Great Lakes region (and not just Rwanda). The article MUST be sanitized off of political narratives and a one-sided version of recent history that has been pushed out by a rival ethnic group-dominated government of Rwanda. This is why a big portion of the article focuses on recent history compared to the ancient history of Hutu people, their kingdoms, kings, tradition, culture, their native language, etc... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bak0ne (talk • contribs) 01:01, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Start a discussion about improving the Hutu page
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "Hutu" page.
- C-Class Africa articles
- Top-importance Africa articles
- C-Class Burundi articles
- Top-importance Burundi articles
- WikiProject Burundi articles
- C-Class Democratic Republic of the Congo articles
- Top-importance Democratic Republic of the Congo articles
- WikiProject Democratic Republic of the Congo articles
- C-Class Rwanda articles
- Top-importance Rwanda articles
- WikiProject Rwanda articles
- WikiProject Africa articles
- C-Class Ethnic groups articles
- High-importance Ethnic groups articles
- WikiProject Ethnic groups articles