Talk:Amhara people/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

removal

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)

Moved text from article

The following commentary was added directly to the article. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:08, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

"***(This is a miss representation of her ancestory, to call her ancestory largely Oromo is largely misleading. In fact her physical appearance has no bearing for her to be largely Oromo. There are physical differences between a typical Oromo and a typical Amhara. And she is a Typical Amhara rather than a Typicl Oromo. Largely, this is a corrupted view of looking at the history of Amharic people. For the start the name Amhara, according to the writer above is completely remomed from the people of Wollo where all indications and historical signposts suggested that it is the origin of the Amharic homeland. However, the name Wollo, it appears, complicated the matter since the name has orginated from Oromia.. This is the result of amalgamating a very large historical era and geographical area with the intetion of overlooking the history of some people who actually see themselves misrepresented for the large part of politically (rather than recording the true movements and histrorical events of people and places) motivated Ethiopian History. Thanks God this is an editable version, So, it is better to write a more accountable history of The Amharic regins rather than follow unsound signposts of chunks of its History." -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.122.76.251 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 6 February 2006.

I have read in "The Central Ethiopians: Amhara, Tigrina, and Related Peoples" by William A. Shack that the midwife performs the circumcision. It was published in 1974.

Disputed

Do priests actually perform circumcisions? I'm told that the midwife does this; the priest might bless the instruments used in the procedure but this is the extent of his involvement. Since I've merely been told this, I won't go so far as to assert it in the article. Perhaps there are local variations regarding the practice? But at least a source for the existing statement would be great. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 19:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Furthermore, I'm wondering if the rest of the information in the "Religion" section is specific to the Amhara, or applies to Ethiopian Orthodox Christians in general. If the latter is the case, then I propose the information be moved to Culture of Ethiopia#Religion. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:07, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

you are absolutely right. It isn't specifically Amhara. Especially the "art" section should be removed. --Tiqur Anbessa 13:32, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Why would the Ethiopian Jews not be regarded as Amhara?

I'm somewhat curious as to what criteria is required to be Amhara. Surely religious divergence does not change people to the extent that they no longer qualify as part of said ethnic group. Tombseye 22:35, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

First of all, you have provided no cite that Beta Israel are "genetically the same", so that would be OR unless you can. Secondly, even if you did have a source, it would be disputed / contested, because neither tribes recognises that they are "genetically the same". Thirdly, Amhara is not a genetic affiliation. The are several unrelated tribes who all adopted the same language and religion, ie , Ethiopian Orthodox. Any tribes like the Beta Israel (who have their own language) are not Amhara; the word Amhara in Ethiopia is virtually synonymous with Orthodox (of course not entirely since there are also Orthodox non Amharas, thise who speak other languages)... Even the so called "Muslim AMharas" are not regarded as fully Amhara, but go by a different name. All of this is sourced, try reading "The Ethiopians" also "Wax and Gold". ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 22:40, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

The info. and link is on the Beta Israel article if you bothered to read it. We're not here to cater to the whims of what people believe. This is an encyclopedia, not a feel good to be whatever ethnic group forum. The Pashtuns don't view non-Muslims as Pashtuns, but that's hardly a reason to exclude Pashtun Jews. Yes, thanks but I know what Amhara believe and realize the exclusion of non-Orthodox, BUT these people are clearly related regardless of what they care to believe. You can also try reading 'Oromia and Ethiopia: State Formation and Ethnonational conflict' and 'History of Ethiopia'. Again, we aren't here to cater to people. Speakers of Amharic are Amhara. As for the article, it's frankly a mess. Disjointed, badly written and badly sourced. If you have a problem with one thing I wrote, then why revert the whole thing? It's not located in the Horn of Africa, for example? Tombseye 22:59, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Dude, neither the Amhara not the Beta Israel consider themselves to be one group. Why go out of your way to pretend to be an expert and say something totally contradictory to what the groups themselves say and chalk it off as "not catering"...? Come on, that is purely ridiculous. Find a source, any source, that says the two groups are the same, if it's not OR, and don't try pointing at wikipedia as your source. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 23:10, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

There are definitely Ethiopian Jews whose only language is Amharic, just as there are Ethiopian Jews who only speak Tigrigna. They are to be viewed as Amhara or Tigraway, respectively.--Tiqur Anbessa 13:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, the other thing you wrote about "AMhara live adjacent to the Red Sea" is also totally wrong and uninformed. The Amhara do not live adjacent to the Red Sea. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 23:11, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Uh okay. I'm not an expert, but this article does need a lot of work. Great, so you get to decide what is put into this article? I take it you're the expert then? Well, perhaps you should learn to read more carefully. I wrote that they live in the Horn of Africa which is adjacent to the Red Sea and not that the Amhara live adjacent to the Red Sea. Geez, talk about arrogant. I encounter lots of people who may be off-track, but strangely enough I don't make snide remarks. I didn't point to wikipedia as my source. I said the article on the Beta Israel links to genetic studies about their links to the peoples of Ethiopia. Man, are you this lazy or just stuck in, "I know all I need to know from the book I read." Well, when talking about Amharic speakers and their genetic links to each other, they clearly are closely related, but I won't push that issue. I do believe they can listed as a related people though. As for the article, it needs to be re-written. Perhaps your expertise could be better served by copyediting after I do something to fix the mess? Or do you plan to re-write the article? And the population stats are projections from the 1994 data or is that uninformed too? Tombseye 23:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

The article was written by several experts beside myself, if you have any problems with it I strongly advise you to bring up your specific proposals on this page first. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 23:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

We're talking about the 6 paragraphs which took several experts? Where's the info. on culture, society? The history section is extremely meager as well. Nothing about the Richard Leakey finds or the theory on the links between most human populations the genetic markers found in modern Ethiopia. No mention of the traditional views of descent from Solomon and Sheba and Amhara claims of lineage. Nothing about ties to Kush. Nothing about literacy rates, gender issues, religious change (encroachment of Islam and Evangelicals). What exactly do you want to discuss in an article that hasn't got much to say anyway? Tombseye 23:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

The Richard Leakey finds are not even Homo Sapiens. Come back when you have something intelligent to say. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 23:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Lol. You mean this Richard Leakey find?[1] If you're the barometer of intelligence I'm really not worried given your reading and comprehension skills thus far. Tell you what sport, you keep your little article with its massive information on the Amhara. I'm not in the mood to play an edit war with you. Tombseye 00:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Clearly, any speculation on identifying which modern tribe living in the 21st century is relevant for discussion of an allegedly 60,000 year old skull, is original research, no matter what species the skull was. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 00:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

What and who is an Amhara?

I think the history section is very messed up. The fight for Power wasn't between "Amharas and Tigrayans". And the Gondarine period is strongly influenced by Agew (for example Empress Mentewab) and Oromos. I also highly doubt that the "Amharas" ever saw themselves as one entity before the 19th century. It has been argued that Amharic was a certain kind of Patois of Ethiopia - a language spoken by the people living in the periphery of the Aksumite empire. If that is true, then Amharic is not a language of some "tribe", but the language of people with a diverse background. Even today many Amharas prefer to say "amarigna tenagari" (Amharic speaker) instead of Amhara. --Tiqur Anbessa 13:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

"related groups" info removed from infobox

For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all {{Infobox Ethnic group}} infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 20:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Territorial

The amharas are not territorially defined through out their history.Since the emmergence of ethno centric political,economic and military power in the early 1990s an artificial Amhara Nation is created.If one takes into concideration the Emperial and Derg geographic divisions,i.e,administrative,Amhara today shrunk beyond recognition. Traditonal Amhar Gondar,Amhara Gojam,Amhara wolo,Amhara Shewa are disected in an operation theatre like fashion .An 87 year old man somewher in Armacheho told me "it is just like gone with the wind" to watch yor ancestral farming lands become part of "sudan" in a flash.He was crying like a child talking to me about the trajedies and tribulations that ordinary landless amharas are going through now a days. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.88.223 (talk) 15:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

May 2010

According to Ethiopian ethnographer Donald Levine, "Amharic-speaking Shewans consider themselves closer to non-Amharic-speaking Shewans than to Amharic-speakers from distant regions like Gonder."

While I have respect for Professor Donald Levine, in this one quote he has made a very stupid mistake. The reason I say that is that the quote actually misspeaks for me (I am an Amhara from Shewa.)

it might have been the case that our ancestors felt more connections with the people in their neighborhood than those living in distant areas. However this has dramatically changed in the last 20 years of ethnic persecutions instigated by TPLF. Right now, all my relatives and neighbors I know from my area feel culturally, linguistically and in every other sense very "Amhara." (Painfully I must add). Honestly, I do not see much difference between the Amharic spoken in Gonder and that which is spoken in my home, Menze as opposed to that which is spoken in Addis. So yes, Donald Levine is wrong for two reasons 1)he is talking for me , which is a no-no 2) He should update himself rather than talk from research done 50 years ago

For these reasons I have deleted his quote for being false, misleading, misinformed and out of date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.72.64 (talk • contribs) 18:48, 6 May 2010

USEFUL INFORMATION to TPLF PROPAGANDA ratio in this article is 0 to 1.

Can you point to a reliable source (other than your personal knowledge) that indicates Levine is inaccurate? Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:32, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

References

Infobox Images for Ethnic Groups

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups#Infobox Images for Ethnic Groups. Gyrofrog (talk) 18:46, 20 January 2011 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}}) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:46, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

---

All those who live in the Amara region call themselves Amara is wrong. Examples are the Cushitic speaking Agaws and Qimants.

Etymology

"To learn" and "to grant mercy" are definitely not derived from the same linguistic root. The first is መሀረ (mähärä) መሐር (mäḥärä). Very similar. But NOT the same. 87.145.108.46 (talk) 01:30, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Disputed.

I agree. This page is horrible and racist!!! REMOVE IT!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.87.163.90 (talk) 14:54, 9 May 2011 (UTC) I will not be discussing in this page. I request that my participation in this propaganda page be removed permanently. 71.191.58.166 (talk)

The following quote is misleading, dishonest and bordering racism which you can tell by simple reasoning. It needs to be removed.

The Amhara can thus be said to exist in the sense of being a fused stock, a supra-ethnically conscious ethnic Ethiopian serving as the pot in which all the other ethnic groups are supposed to melt. The language, Amharic, serves as the center of this melting process although it is difficult to conceive of a language without the existence of a corresponding distinct ethnic group speaking it as a mother tongue. The Amhara does not exist, however, in the sense of being a distinct ethnic group promoting its own interests and advancing the Herrenvolk philosophy and ideology as has been presented by the elite politicians. The basic principle of those who affirm the existence of the Amhara as a distinct ethnic group, therefore, is that the Amhara should be dislodged from the position of supremacy and each ethnic group should be freed from Amhara domination to have equal status with everybody else. This sense of Amhara existence can be viewed as a myth.

1. The use of "supra-ethnic" hints at people who are above the rest of Ethiopians and shouldn't be promoted by wikipedia.

2. There is a region called Amhara region in Ethiopia. People who live in that region call themselves Amhara. The idea that Amhara is "a pot in which all other ethnic groups are supposed to melt" was true when people from that region had control over the government and required everyone to speak Amharic. It is not true anymore.

3. The idea that "Amharic doesn't exist as a distinct group promoting its own interest" is dishonest. It goes against historical facts and what we read about Amhara even on this page.

4. Again blaming the existance of Amhara in those who want to "dislodge" it from supermancy is dishonest. Amharas call themselves Amhara, NOT simply amharic speakers. This can be verified by simply asking an Amhara person or any other ethiopian individual or history books. Identity is better left the people themselves.

5. A century and half ago there was no country called Ethiopia. it was Abyssinia. So, the idea that Amharas used to refer to themselves simply as Ethiopians then is also dishonest.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.228.250 (talk • contribs) 08:14, 16 May 2009

Citation

This page is more like a propaganda page than an encyclopedia article. Please cite your sources, thank you. EthioHistory (talk) 12:39, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Earliest Historical reference to a people called Amhara

Is there any info on earliest refernce to Amhara people. Is it 1000 years old, pre-Christianity, pre-Axsum? I just got some of the answers from the above talk page. But what is the earliest ref?--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ (talk) 18:53, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Baptism

There is some confusion about baptism. "An infant boy is baptized on the 40th day and 80 days for a girl, before going to the church for baptism" cannot be right, as it suggests baptism twice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 01:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Only once - on the 40th day for a boy, and the 80th for a girl. (per the Eth. Bible, book of Kufale). What it means and should say is "after waiting 40 / 80 days before going to the church. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 03:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Notable Amhara people

I tagged the "Notable Amhara people" section with {{Unreferenced section}} a year ago, simply because it lacks sources indicating that all the listed people are Amhara. Teddy Afro, for instance, has previously been identified elsewhere as either Oromo or Gurage; meanwhile his article mentions nothing (and doesn't cite a source) about his ethnicity. Who, in this list, is verifiably Amhara, as opposed to simply speaking the Amharic language or having an Amharic name? (See also: Validity of ethnic group status). If speaking the language and/or having an Amharic name actually are the criteria for inclusion, then this list really isn't useful or meaningful. Given WP:Source list, WP:LISTPEOPLE, etc. the list should be backed up with references, and/or the individual articles should (1) mention the subject's Amhara ethnicity and (2) cite a source to that effect, especially where WP:BLP is concerned. Finally, in a couple of instances, WP:WTAF applies. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 22:01, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Gembres (talk · contribs) asked me on my talk page (link) about my edits to this article. I am posting my response here, where other editors may see it. Gembres, the reasons I have reverted some of your edits are due to my concerns about the "Notable Amhara people" section, as follows:

1. The list of notable people is unverified and indiscriminate – see WP:Source list. How do we know that any of these people are Amhara? Because they have Amharic names? (Though couldn't some of these be Tigrinya names?) Because they speak or write in the Amharic language? What makes a person an Amhara person?
2. Because the list of notable people is unverified and indiscriminate, I had tagged that section with {{Unreferenced section}}. (See previous paragraph.) You removed that tag (link) without addressing the problem, or at least explaining why you removed it.
3. I think in some cases that WP:BLP could be a concern, if we go around labeling people's ethnicity without sources to corroborate such assertions.
4. You've been adding names of people that do not have Wikipedia articles written about them. Please see WP:WTAF and WP:BLP. Again, it's a list about notable people (and this is leaving aside the fact of whether or not they are verifiably Amhara).

-- Gyrofrog (talk) 03:12, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Additionally, the Ethiopian government (at least, the current government) measures ethnicity in its censuses (example, as cited in the religion section). One might ask what criteria the government uses to determine whether someone is Amhara, but more importantly, how do we determine whether the notable people in the list meet those criteria (whatever they may be)? (Though I would also note that the ethiopar.net website appears to be quasi-official, at best (the current website says "Ethiopar is a 3rd party informational website and is in no way affiliated with any branch of the government of Ethiopia")). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 03:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Gembres left a comment on my talk page (link), but I prefer to respond here. Gembres wrote, "Actually you can't prove for most of the individuals. There is no database where you can go and find the ethnicity of a person. There are no documents online where you can verify this." This is entirely the point that I am trying to make. And it's precisely why the information is incompatible with Wikipedia's verification policy. I can imagine where a "List of Amharic-language singers" or "List of Amharic-language writers" would be both more useful and more easily verifiable than this. As for other ethnicities, Oromo and Somali seem more clear-cut to me; even Tigrinya ethnicity seems more well defined, if only because of its nationalist movement. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

I have removed the section, for the above stated reasons. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:40, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Gembres had since restored the section (minus the maintenance tag); I have again deleted it. What's curious is that he's since gone and made the same deletion for other ethnic groups, using the same rationale that I've given here (though I've said why I did not think it applied the same way to those groups as it does for this one). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:16, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand why he's done that, but Gyrofrog invited me here as I've been involved in similar issues. Just today I was discussing this about a list of notable alumni. Yes, entries need reliable sources concerning their ethnicity and they should normally have articles. The situation is that if they don't have articles they need sources to show that they meet WP:PEOPLE, and if those can be found a stub should be created. Dougweller (talk) 18:34, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

The same standard should be applied to all the ethnic groups. I am the one who added the Notable Oromo People section. But it seems that you guys target the Notable Amhara people section and remove it while you keep the other ethnic groups intact. There looks like some other motive behind your actions.STOP disruptive editing, Gembres, May 12, 2014

I have added the notable Amhara People section. Gembres (talk) 21:30, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Gyrofrog person. You are not an expert in Ethiopian history and can not claim to know all individual. Just because something does not sound Amhara name to you does not mean you can remove it. If you have issues with individual people on the list, tag the individuals rather than removing the entire section. Gembres (talk) 21:25, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Also, if you guys are interested in the history of the individuals listed look up the hard copy books on each individual. Just because you do not know stuff does not give you the right to remove it. Tag your doubt on the article. I am from Ethiopia, and I know more about the individuals than you guys do. Gembres (talk) 21:28, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Gembres, I did tag my doubt on the article, back in February 2013 (here's a link). I also noticed that you, for one, removed it (here's a link). My concerns still stand, 14 months later. I have already explained why I believe it is a different issue with Oromo people, however I also went ahead and cited sources for three of the individuals in that list. It is not my intention to single out any ethnic group, I am focusing on a problem I see with the content of this article. Rather than addressing these concerns you've simply re-instated the list without providing any sources. If there are hard copy books that explicitly say "this person is Amhara," that's great, please cite them. The onus is on you, as the person adding the content. I make no claim to be an expert on this topic, but at the same time I'm not willing to simply take your word for it, either. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:49, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

We definitely have the right to remove unsourced material,, and often the obligation to remove it when it concerns living people. Policy (WP:VERIFY) states "Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. Please remove contentious material about living people that is unsourced or poorly sourced immediately." I've done a mass revert but will put back any sourced ones. Dougweller (talk) 07:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

In addition to what Doug said about WP:VERIFY I would also point to WP:Source list and WP:WTAF. As for other articles about Ethiopian ethnic groups, I'm sure they need work, and in two other cases I've identified these. I've already explained why the Notable People section in this particular article concerns me. If it makes anyone else happy, I've been doing the same thing for numerous articles about Somali clans (for example, I've seen K'naan identified as belonging to any number of different clans, although the article about him makes no mention whatsoever of his clan affiliation). No, I did not treat other (Ethiopian) articles the same way, not yet anyway – for that matter, there are thousands upon thousands of articles within Category:Wikipedia articles with sourcing issues and, no, I am not going to address all of them. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:03, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Gyrofrog I'm not going to have the time today I'd hope to have. If you found 3 with sources, could you replace the section with them included (and only them)? Dougweller (talk) 15:09, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

@Dougweller: The three citations that I mentioned were actually on the Oromo people page, not this one. (It might have been edited or reverted in the meantime; I haven't looked.) I'm actually starting a draft for Notable Amhara People (I'll post about it here in a few minutes). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:24, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

This might be as good (or bad?) a time as any to point out that other ethnic group articles (for example, Tamil people, Germans) don't include lists like this one at all, for what that's worth. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Why don't you put the same level of scrutiny for the other ethnic groups. Check the Tigre people, most of the people are not even on wikipeida and no one seems to care while you are scruinizing the Amhara people list?? You should remove the individuals listed under Oromo People and Tigrigina people unless you have referenced them. Gembres (talk) 06:54, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Draft list

I have started a draft, Talk:Amhara people/Notable people, demonstrating how this list should work (based on WP:V, WP:Source list and WP:WTAF). Here's the methodology I've used (so far):

I went through the first five individuals on Gembres's version of the list: Afewerk Tekle, Aklilu Habte-Wold, Aster Aweke, Asrat Woldeyes, Baeda Maryam III. Of these five individuals, only three of their respective articles even mention the words "Amhara" or "Amharic": Afewerk Tekle is in Category:People from Amhara Region, and Aster Aweke's name is rendered in Amharic language, so there's a link to that article and it's in Category:Articles containing Amharic-language text. None of this speaks to the ethnicity of either person, regardless of what we might infer from this information. That leaves Asrat Woldeyes, whose article mentions that he was the leader and founder of the All-Amhara People's Organization. This itself is a fairly strong indicator of ethnicity – and it's the same reason why I previously said that this issue is more clear for other articles, such as Oromo people and Tigray-Tigrinya people (given their respective nationalist movements). But better yet, Asrat Woldeyes cites a source that says he is Amhara ("Asrat was among 21 Amhara professors dismissed from the university in 1993"). So, of the first five individuals, Asrat Woldeyes makes the cut. I'm all but certain that Afewerk Tekle and Aster Aweke are Amhara, but that's not how the Verifiability policy works: "Even if you're sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it".

Looking at the next five people: Belay Zeleke, Bewketu Seyoum, Endalkachew Makonnen, Eskinder Nega, Fasilides. Of the five articles, Belay Zeleke makes mention of the Amharic name Bileh, and Fasilides mentions his castle in Amhara Region and the Amharic language. Nothing in either article about Amhara ethnicity. (Fasilides would seem rather obvious, being a king who ruled from Gondar, but did the Amhara ethnic group exist as such during the 17th century?) The other three articles don't mention the words "Amharic" or "Amhara" at all, and for all the reader knows, they could be Oromo persons with Amharic-language names (I'm not saying that is the case, but – again – just pointing out why this list is problematic). So, out of ten people in the list, only Asrat Woldeyes meets the threshold for inclusion.

Looking at the next five: Fikre Selassie Wogderess, Gebre Mesqel Lalibela, Gelawdewos, Gedion Zelalem, Getatchew Haile. No mention of "Amhara" nor "Amharic" in any of these articles. (13th and 16th century rulers seem particularly suspect.) Out of fifteen people in the list, only Asrat Woldeyes meets the threshold for inclusion.

Looking at the next five: Gigi (singer), Haile Gebrselassie, Haile Selassie, Hailu Shawul, Kitaw Ejigu. Haile Gebrselassie's article mentions his Amharic name, but also notes that we was born in (what is now) Oromia Region. Is he Oromo? Again, that's the problem with lists like this. Hailu Shawul was in the All-Amhara People's Organization, although the article suggests (without any real corroboration) that the party fractured under his watch, so I'm not really sure what that tells us. Kitaw Ejigu mentions his Amharic-language name. The Haile Selassie article cites sources regarding his Amhara, Oromo and Gurage ethnicity (though I'd hope for a better source than this webpage; see WP:SPS).

That's twenty people, and based on the WP:V policy, I've pared them down to two. (Later on I'll work on this some more.) Of course, none of this precludes finding and using other sources that positively establish the ethnicity of these individuals, but they aren't currently in Wikipedia, and furthermore the onus for citing these sources is on the person adding the content. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I went through the rest of the list. The only other article I might have added (at least, as currently written and sourced) is Yimam of Yejju. It cites an article called "Family and Property amongst the Amhara Nobility", in the Journal of African History. Potentially it might verify any number of names (at least among the nobility), but unfortunately, it's behind a paywall and I can't access it. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 17:58, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I am question to which article you are comparing to. You should apply the same level of scrutiny to all ethnic groups. The reason why I am debating on this issue is because the term "Amhara" is very loosely defined term. Some scholars define it as a person whose first language is Amharic. However, traditionally persons from the provinces Gojjam, Gondar, North Shewa, Wollo, are mostly Amharas. The individuals listed above are renown people within their fields. You most likely will not find sources claiming they are Amharas because it is a known fact that Amharas are Ethiopian nationalists and they would also say they are Ethiopian. They never emphasize on their ethnicity. So, the list should be kept with a tag describing the situation. Otherwise, the list of notable Oromo people should also be removed since I can also raise issues since Emperor Haile Selassie is also listed under Oromo people while he is mix of Amhara, Gurage, and Oromo, so if you remove him from the list of notable Amhara people you should also remove it from the list of notable Oromo people. Gembres (talk) 06:49, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

By applying the same level of scrutiny, I have removed people listed under notable Oromo, Tigray-Tigrigna, and Tigre people who were not referenced. Gembres (talk) 06:58, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

You are of course free to edit other articles as you wish, but you shouldn't expect other editors to be able to keep all such articles other scrutiny. There is no way around WP:VERIFY - if there are no sources there are no sources and those people can be called Amhara by Wikipedia. That's basic policy. As for the JSTOR article, someone nag me if I haven't retrieved it in the next 2 days. Just discovered that I've got access through my old university. Dougweller (talk) 10:47, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Population figures

Various edits have changed the Ethiopian census figure (e.g. 17,870,651 or 27,870,651), but the cited report says 19,870,651. As for the figures cited to the Joshua Project, I've removed them from the infobox. It does not look like Wikipedians have reached consensus that Joshua Project is a reliable source -- if anything, there's something closer to a consensus that it is an unreliable source. See relevant discussions from Jan. 2014, May 2013, Nov. 2010, Aug.-Sep. 2010, and Jan.-Feb. 2009. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I should've also mentioned that the Joshua Project's figure for Ethiopia differs from the official census by approximately 10 million. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:35, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

I checked the CIA World Factbook (link) to see how its population figures compare with those of the Ethiopian census. The Factbook does not break the figures down by ethnicity, but by language. It shows "Amharic (official national language) 29.3%" which would be 28,313,603 based on a total population of 96,633,458. However, these are people who speak Amharic, not necessarily the same as those who are Amhara. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:49, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

pre-Christian religion of Amharas?

I've long been wondering if the Amharas practiced another religion before Christianity. Gringo300 19:04, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure, myself. I don't know the name of the religion practiced in Aksum prior to the introduction of Christianity. That would have been prior to the 4th century AD. I don't know if there was yet "Amhara" (or Gurage or Tigrinya etc.) as such. Ge'ez was in use for a while before it evolved into the present-day languages, but I don't know which came first: the ethnic groups or the languages? For all I know the ethnic groups are based on linguistic differences. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 21:31, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

I believe Gyrofrog is basically correct; there was no "Amhara" or Gurage or Tigrinya in pre-Christian times, and yes, the "ethnic" groups were originally based more or less on linguistic differences... According to Ethiopian historians, the religion of Aksum prior to Christianity, but after Menelik I (980 BC-330 AD), was Mosaic Judaism, but with about one half the people in the area following Pagan cults. ፈቃደ 22:52, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually if you read the Peripeleus of the Erythraen Sea and Monumentum Adulitanum, you would know that the Tigrettas, Blemyeess etc (Current Ethnic Groups in Eritrea) have existed for along time. Now as for the "Am-hara" people(ethnic group), I doubt there really exists continuous Ethnic group for 1000s of years. Most Amhara(Amara) will deny they exist as a separate Ethnic group... 2001:558:600A:4B:797E:C49F:4F3A:DC93 (talk) 04:25, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, many Amhara are Oriental Orthodox. Gringo300 (talk) 23:48, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Ethnic groups are modern creations. Amharas, Oromos, Tigres, etc.... did not exist 1000 years ago. Hence, you can not ask what is the religion of Amharas in pre-Christian era. A more refined question you may ask is what was a religion of the ancestors of the Amhara people.Gembres (talk) 21:53, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

supposed "consensus" on Amhara images

The consensus you are pointing to is a Nazi's "consensus" - "It was already decided by some other people elsewhere and you weren't locally notified. You will now comply as your opinions are irrelevant to "consensus". 172.56.35.132 (talk) 13:15, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Amharic

The Amharic language spiel is a copyright violation of Meyer (2006) [2]. Soupforone (talk) 16:47, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Genocide on Amhara People

Call for action - not appropriate use of article talk page, please see WP:TALK

Genocide Committed Against the Amara (Amhara) in Ethiopia, specifically in Benshangul-Gumuz Regional State, Metekel Zone Map፦ Wereda Boundaries of Benshangul-Gumuz Regional State Special Report on Genocide against the Amara (Amhara) Vol. 3, No.1 Tuesday August 18, 2015 2 Massacre of the Amara (Amhara) in Benshangul-Gumuz Regional State, Metekel Zone  The unspeakable atrocities committed are hard to understand and bear in mind.  There is no sufficient vocabulary that can describe one human being murdering and cannibalizing another human being.  Members of the Gumuz ethnic group slaughtered Amaras and consumed their flesh. 1. Background/Introduction This report has been compiled on the recent incidents of genocide in Wembera and Bulen district (Woredas) of Metekel Zone of Benshangul-Gumuz Regional State in Ethiopia. The report pinpoints and underscores the outrageous atrocities committed by members of the Gumuz ethnic group against Amaras with the full knowledge and encouragement of Tigrean People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), the current Oligarchy ruling Ethiopia. The cruel and inhumane crimes are another sad chapter in recent human history. During the last 25 years the ruling TPLF regime and its cohorts have committed various gruesome human rights violations against members of the Amara (Amhara) ethnic group in Ethiopia. Based on factual evidence compiled by Ethiopian Human Rights Organization (EHRO), Human Rights Watch (HRW) and others, thousands of Amaras have been systematically evicted and displaced from all corners of Ethiopia through TPLF sponsored ethnic cleansing program. At a hearing testimony presented to the TPLF rubber stamp Parliament by Miss Samia Zekaria, Director of the Central Statistical Agency, she had publicly admitted that between 1994 and 2007, about 2.5 million Amaras have been systematically unaccounted for in the 2007 census 3 results1. This fact is corroborated by independent research results, and through interviews of Amaras who escaped and survived the genocide and the systematic elimination. According to eye witness accounts of the survivors, the number of Amaras removed from their livelihoods and eliminated during the last 24 years could soar up to about 6 million2. In a reminiscent of Italian fascist massacre of the 1930s, when captured Ethiopian resistance fighters suffered with not even a piece of cloth to hide their delicate organs day and night, beginning in 2012 through 2014, Amaras have been particularly singled out for eviction, genocide, and ethnic cleansing in Benshangul-Gumuz Regional State. 2. Precursors of the Massacre The current crisis in Metekel Zone of Benshangul-Gumuz regional state was instigated in relation to the elections of May 2015. About a month before the fateful election, Special Police Force of the regional state had been sent to Wembera and Bulen Woredas of the zone to quell any rebellion against the TPLF rule. Since the TPLF coined in its political program as a struggle against “Amara and imperialism” and labeled the Amaras as staunch enemies of the Tigrean people, it is generally assumed that the opposition to TPLF’s apartheid-style rule would come from the Amara ethnic group. Accordingly TPLF instigated members of the Gumuz ethnic group to single out and hunt down Amaras living in Metekel Zone. In this particular case the mission given to the Special Police Force was to terrorize the local population in Wembera and Bulen Weredas of Metekel Zone so that by coercion they are forced to elect TPLF candidates for local and national parliament. Those Amaras who were suspected of supporting opposition parties were rounded up and thrown into jail. The pretext given by local authorities was that those Amaras were armed and have been supporting rebel groups who 1Starting from 16th minute: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndSzSPskwAw 2 http://ethiomedia.com/101facts/census_analysis_amara.pdf 4 waging armed insurrection against TPLF rule. Based on the pretext given, the remaining peaceful local Amara population came under constant harassment and intimidation by the Special Police Force. In addition, Kebele officials in those Weredas were instructed by the regional and Zonal officials to persecute Amaras secretly and systematically in order to avoid any perceived condemnation by international organizations and foreign governments. About a month before the May 2015 election, a man from the Gumuz ethnic group was found dead in Wembera Wereda. The exact cause for the death of that person was a mystery. However, zonal officials came and gathered the local population in separate ethnic groups: the Oromo, Gumuz, Shinasha, Agew and Amara. The officials gathered the Amaras last, and demanded that they (the Amaras) should identify, who amongst them, has killed the Gumuz person. Since no one from the Amara ethnic group committed the crime, they were not in a position to identify the alleged Amhara killer amongst them. However, the zonal and Wereda officials were adamant that the Amaras committed the crime and directed the Kebele officials to settle the case without leaving any trace of evidence. That is how the massacre was started. 3. Massacre in Melkan Kebele The instructions to round up and massacre Amaras were received by officials of Melkan Kebele in Wembera Wereda. On May 16 and 17, 2015 Amhara children, elderly, women, expecting mothers and the disabled were picked up from their homes, imprisoned and murdered in cold blood. Like Mussolini’s fascist massacre of Ethiopians in Addis Ababa in the 1930s, the Gumuz carried out their mission of genocide using machetes, knives, shovels, axes and also with live bullets. In those two days 160 Amaras were slaughtered like sacrificial animals (Please refer the Table 1 for further details). Those who tried run and escape the wholesale massacre were chased, shot point blank and fell in the bushes of the area. 5 Young, old, pregnant, and elderly Amaras found hiding in their homes, were also slaughtered indiscriminately. All male victims were castrated; breasts of female victims were slashed, and taken as trophies by the Gumuz hordes. The killers left all the victims’ beds and clothes stained in blood. After the massacre the killers used the dishes and utensils of the victims for feasting on the flesh of those they killed. The livers and kidneys of Amara victims were immersed in chili powder and eaten. In a nutshell the torso of the perpetrators became the burial grounds of the slaughtered Amaras. To date, not a single corpse of the massacred Amaras were buried, and their skeletons are either thrown into the Gursha River, which crosses the area, or scattered everywhere in the village. 4. Massacre Committed in Ayigali-Mozambique Kebele About a month after the Melkan massacre, a similar incident occurred on June 19, 2015 in Ayigali-Mozambique Kebele, Bulen Wereda, Metekel Zone of the Benshangul-Gumuz region. In this case eye witness accounts said that the scale and breadth of the massacre could be less compared with what happened in Melkan Kebele. However, the Amara were the sole victims of the June 19, 2015 massacre. What happened in Ayigali-Mozambique Kebele has been the torchlight for this whole report. Two of the perpetrators from the local Gumuz community were apprehended by the police. The Bulen district police inspector, who investigated the two suspects, happened to be from the Oromo community. During the investigation, the police inspector asked the two suspects how they carried out the massacre. Unashamed of their deeds the suspects boastfully told the inspector how they committed the atrocity: They said that they killed the two Amaras, castrated their genitals, and consumed their livers and kidneys. Upon hearing the testimony of the two suspects, the Bulen Wereda police inspector was in an utter and complete shock. She then collapsed and threw up at the scene (Please refer the Table 1 for further details). 6 Moresh Wegenie Amara Organization has managed to collect basic information on the names and addresses of 88 of the total 162 Amara victims. We are still in the process of collecting and compiling further evidence in this regard. More is yet to come to light in the near future. Table 1: List of the Amara victims who were massacred by members of the Gumuz community in Melkan and Ayigali-Mozambique Kebeles No. Name of Victim Number of Family Members Killed Wereda (Kebele) Remarks 1 Mr. Walelign Geremew Wembera (Melkan) The remains of most of the victims were thrown into the Gursha River. However, how many of the corpses were thrown into the river and how many of them were consumed by the perpetrators had not been confirmed. This information is kept as a top secret by the Government of the Benshangul-Gumuz Regional State. The Regional Government has admitted that 30 Amaras (Amaras) have been killed. 2 Mr. Alemu Kassa 4 Wembera (Melkan) 3 Mr. Melku Bitew 2 Wembera (Melkan) 4 Mr. Almeye Abebe 4 Wembera (Melkan) 5 Mr. Bekele Abebe 3 Wembera (Melkan) 6 Mr. Kassie Abebe Wembera (Melkan) 7 Mr. Mulat Tadesse Wembera (Melkan) 8 Mr. Demissie Walelign 6 Wembera (Melkan) 9 Mr. Demeke Tadesse Wembera (Melkan) 10 Mr. Nebret Melesse 5 Wembera (Melkan) 11 Mr. Chale Mengiste 1 Wembera (Melkan) 12 Mr. Shiferaw Worke Wembera (Melkan) 13 Mr. Alemu Tilaye Wembera (Melkan) 14 Mrs. Tirunesh Tilaye 3 Wembera (Melkan) 15 Mrs. Yirgedu Tilaye Wembera (Melkan) 16 Mrs. Felegush Kassaye 4 Wembera (Melkan) 17 Mr. Getahun Debasu Wembera (Melkan) 18 Mr. Abitew Wole 3 Wembera (Melkan) 19 Mr. Adisse Wole (Student) Wembera (Melkan) 20 Mr. Kindineh Wole (Student) Wembera (Melkan) 7 21 Mrs. Kebebush Girma Wembera (Melkan) 22 Mr. Ayalew Getahun 4 Wembera (Melkan) 23 Mr. Dereje Adamu 5 Wembera (Melkan) 24 Mr. Tehayneh Adamu Wembera (Melkan) 25 Mr. Wassihun Girma 5 Wembera (Melkan) 26 Mr. Yesanbel Zemene Wembera (Melkan) 27 Mr. Yitbarek Melaku Wembera (Melkan) 28 Mr. Atinaf Alemu Wembera (Melkan) 29 Mr. Melesse Hunegnaw Wembera (Melkan) 30 Mr. Workineh Tefera Wembera (Melkan) 31 Mr. Desalew Bayable Wembera (Melkan) 32 Mr. Welelaw Seyoum Wembera (Melkan) 33 Mr. Geremew Fente Wembera (Melkan) 34 Mr. Muluneh Wembera (Melkan) 35 Mr. Bire Solomon Wembera (Melkan) 36 Mr. Weregnaw Zeleke Wembera (Melkan) 37 Mr. Meshesha Desalegn Wembera (Melkan) 38 Mr. Gashaw Fantahun Bulen (Aygali-Mozambique) His kidneys and liver were consumed by the killers; remains of his corpse were not buried. 39 Mr. Takele Bizualem Bulen (Aygali-Mozambique) His kidneys and liver were consumed by the killers; remains of his corpse were not buried. Total 88 persons 5. What Awaits the Amara in Metekel Zone From reports we have received almost all Amara who used to live in some Kebeles of Wembera Wereda have been systematically eliminated by the local Gumuz and Shinasha communities. A contingent of about 28 members of the Special Police Force of Benshangul-Gumuz region, are 8 hunting down any remaining Amara in those areas. No one is spared; even pregnant women, the elderly, the disabled and children. Based on the information we have, about 224 Amaras have been displaced and forced to flee for their lives from Dobi and Chilanko Kebeles of Bulen Wereda (Please refer Table 2 for the details). Table 2: List of the Amara victims who have been evicted from Dobi & Chilanko Kebeles, Bulen Wereda, Metekel Zone No. Name of Displaced Person Family Size Affected Wereda (Kebele) 1 Mr. Melke Zegeye 10 Bulen (Dobi) 2 Mr. Chale Melke 7 Bulen (Dobi) 3 Mr. Ijigu Yismaw 11 Bulen (Dobi) 4 Mr. Sintayehu Ijigu 3 Bulen (Dobi) 5 Mr. Belete Mulu 5 Bulen (Dobi) 6 Mr. Tewachew Gashu 3 Bulen (Dobi) 7 Mr. Nebretu Melesse 8 Bulen (Dobi) 8 Mr. Wudneh Zegeye 5 Bulen (Dobi) 9 Mr. Girmaw Zegeye 4 Bulen (Dobi) 10 Mr. Melkamu Melaku 5 Bulen (Dobi) 11 Mr. Sewareg Adamu 8 Bulen (Dobi) 12 Mr. Melsew Sewareg 2 Bulen (Dobi) 13 Mr. Matebe Muluneh 3 Bulen (Dobi) 14 Mr. Astewul Ayalew 5 Bulen (Dobi) 15 Mr. Abebe Alebachew 3 Bulen (Dobi) 16 Mr. Endeshaw Tarekegn 2 Bulen (Dobi) 17 Mr. Adigo Gedefaw 5 Bulen (Dobi) 18 Mr. Assefa Tilahun 3 Bulen (Dobi) 19 Mr. Nibret Yilmaw 4 Bulen (Dobi) 20 Mr. Simeneh Nibret 2 Bulen (Dobi) 9 21 Mr. Gereme Ijigu 2 Bulen (Dobi) 22 Mr. Alemineh Welelaw 5 Bulen (Dobi) 23 Mr. Wuletaw Endeshaw 4 Bulen (Dobi) 24 Mr. Desse Endeshaw 5 Bulen (Dobi) 25 Mr. Kelemu Taye 7 Bulen (Dobi) 26 Mr. Melkamu Taye 3 Bulen (Dobi) 27 Mr. Kassa Tefera 7 Bulen (Chilanko) 28 Mr. Abebe Kassie 2 Bulen (Chilanko) 29 Mr. Gedamu Mulu 12 Bulen (Chilanko) 30 Mr. Melkamu Abeje 7 Bulen (Chilanko) 31 Mr. Negash Abeje 6 Bulen (Chilanko) 32 Mr. Chane Tilahun 7 Bulen (Chilanko) 33 Mr. Desse Gedam 5 Bulen (Chilanko) 34 Mr. Getaneh Gedam 4 Bulen (Chilanko) 35 Mr. Nega Asfaw 6 Bulen (Chilanko) 36 Mr. Bere Gashew 4 Bulen (Chilanko) 37 Mr. Mulealem Abebe 4 Bulen (Chilanko) 38 Mr. Mengistu Ewunetu 3 Bulen (Chilanko) 39 Mr. Chale Abe 4 Bulen (Chilanko) 40 Mr. Baze Chekol 5 Bulen (Chilanko) 41 Mr. Desse Abe 8 Bulen (Chilanko) 42 Mr. Admite Keleme 3 Bulen (Chilanko) 43 Mr. Wasse Addis 6 Bulen (Chilanko) 44 Mr. Gete Adugna 2 Bulen (Chilanko) 45 Mr. Tefera Admas 3 Bulen (Chilanko) 46 Mr. Shite 2 Bulen (Chilanko) Total 224 10 6. A Call for Action It is apparent from the international news blackout that little has been reported about this massacre in the media. Unless awareness to the atrocities mentioned here is highlighted through the international media, we are certain that the Amaras are condemned to perish from various regions of Ethiopia without any trace. We learn from history that similar genocide took place in the past on Armenians by the Ottoman Turks, on the Jews by Nazi Germany, on the Tutsis by the Hutus, and so on. The world community will never react and stop the genocide unless members of the victimized ethnic group come together and take action. Therefore, we specifically call upon all Amaras scattered throughout the globe to sensitize the world community at large about the genocide and ethnic cleansing committed and still being committed against the Amara in Ethiopia. It is a moral and judicial responsibility of international organizations such as the UN, governments which support the TPLF regime such as the United States, Great Britain, and members of the European Union, to stop the ongoing genocide on the Amara, which is deliberately orchestrated by the TPLF and its cohorts. Let’s act together to stop this carnage against the Amara!</ref></ref> 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. Source 38. Leads to a Cambridge site with an article that mentions Ham and negroid but no Amhara or any other ethnic group specifically Source 39. Leads to an article which mentions Qemant, Eritreans and Beta Israel but no mention of Amhara The topic in itself no longer applies to current Ethiopia since slavery is abolished in 1942 References 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) 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) @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) 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) @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) @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) 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) @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) 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) @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) 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) @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) (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) 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) 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. 86.89.46.70 (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC) @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) 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. 86.89.46.70 (talk) 17:25, 8 January 2017 (UTC) References 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) 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) @86.89.46.70: On Mordechai, see separate sub-section below. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC) 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) 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) Okay. Soupforone (talk) 17:18, 9 January 2017 (UTC) 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) 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) In wikipedia, if we quote the source, we quote it exactly. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 21:47, 13 January 2017 (UTC) 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) 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) 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) 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" [3]. Soupforone (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC) @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) 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" [4]. Soupforone (talk) 17:27, 9 January 2017 (UTC) @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) 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) Indeed Duqsene, Levine is in all likelihood alluding to expeditions in Amhara territory by the Adal Sultanate. He actually mentions these elsewhere [5]. Soupforone (talk) 03:23, 10 January 2017 (UTC) This source mentions successive Adal Sultans defeating Amhara commanders and capturing slaves in Bale [6] Duqsene (talk) 09:01, 10 January 2017 (UTC) @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) 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) @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 [7] and the Afar are called Adal [8] 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 [9] [10] Duqsene (talk) 20:30, 10 January 2017 (UTC) 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) @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) @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 [11] @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) @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) 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) Done. Soupforone (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2017 (UTC) 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) 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) 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) 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) 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) Yeah, it's embedded in the url; it's actually over several pages [12] [13]. Soupforone (talk) 03:18, 10 January 2017 (UTC) 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) Unfortunately, I only have library access so I can't link to the whole thing [14]. Soupforone (talk) 06:30, 11 January 2017 (UTC) 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. Thank you! 86.89.46.70 (talk) 19:28, 9 January 2017 (UTC) References @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) 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)

Amhara, Abyssinian

@Resourcer1: your edit claimed, "Doesn't agree with the 'Abyssinian people' page you spent months messing up". Who is this "you", and which edit are you referring to? Please provide diffs. Why delete the summary from WP:RS? Please explain your edit warring. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:44, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

@Ms Sarah Welch: Abyssinian (Habesha people) includes many other ethnic groups as the Abyssinian page states. This page only lists 2.Resourcer1 (talk) 15:09, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Thats not true. Linguistic terminology is different from an ethnic one. Duqsene (talk) 15:15, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

@Resourcer1: Please don't delete sourced content and cited reliable sources. If you find other reliable sources that support what you allege, you can add them as well for NPOV. Repeatedly deleting content and citations simply because of personal opinions / prejudice / wisdom, or after false allegations and personal attacks, is disruption and WP:TE. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 15:21, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

New dispute tags

@86.89.46.70: you placed three new tags. Please explain the dispute: is it with the sources, or something else? what? why? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:42, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Amhara people, Amharic language

I have removed the misleading OR-Synthesis in the infobox. The sources are presenting Amharic language speakers, not Amhara ethnic group demographics. Those sources would be useful in Amharic language article, not this one. If someone can find sources that present Amhara ethnic group demographics, it would be a welcome revision / addition. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:52, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

The languages in United States are spoken at home as the source indicates, how else should a ethno-linguistic group define themselves abroad than their own language? Other ethnic groups abroad can mention the languages they speak in the United States, nobody is forced to say they speak Amharic at home in a census. 86.89.46.70 (talk) 05:49, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I see that the source for many of these figures is the Joshua Project. I don't think that's regarded as a reliable source. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:29, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I disagree with you uses a whole host of sources. Those figures are the best estimates for now, if you have more reliable sources share it? Cordless Larry (talk)86.89.46.70 (talk) 12:05, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

References

@86.89.46.70: Please do not sign or append Cordless Larry name at the end of your comment. I have struck it out above. I agree with Cordless Larry, Joshua Project is not a reliable source. I browsed the site, there is no evidence of peer review, it itself states that the data is ballmark and may be unreliable, and it compiles information from unknown sources. Wikipedia cannot present such suspect data as accurate. We can and should mention that Amharic language speakers are found in [list of countries], with appropriate sources, but we must clarify that this does not mean these speakers are of Amhara ethnic group since the language is region based and is also spoken by some from non-Amhara Ethiopian ethnic groups. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 12:30, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

(talk) Well i disagree you, since the data is best available estimate and is compiled from various global, regional and national researchers. If you can find a better source than the sources Joshua Project use, share it. The data is moved to the languages part of the section, and it clearly says Amharic speakers by region. 86.89.46.70 (talk) 13:00, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm not saying that I have a better source. I'm saying that the Joshua Project hasn't historically been regarded as reliable on Wikipedia, from what discussion I've seen of it. See, for example, Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 80#Reliability of the Joshua Project as source. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:15, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

@86.89.46.70: If we don't have a reliable source, we can choose to remain silent. There is little encyclopedic value in adding suspect information such as "87 people in Luxembourg may be Amhara!, or that 1,200 people in this or that European country are guessed by Joshuaproject.net to be speaking Amharic!". It is strange that you dispute content based on multiple peer reviewed scholarly publications, yet wish to include suspect data from websites you appear to agree may not be reliable. Yes, while "Amharic speakers by region" is better than misleading everyone by showing those numbers as "Amhara ethnic group" demographics, we must [1] keep what is from reliable sources, [2] clarify that Amharic speakers include Amhara and non-Amhara Ethiopian ethnic groups. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 13:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

talk) A still active user agrees with the data provided, while the other (no longer active user) says it claims are based on reliable secondary sources. It comes down to whether the sources Joshua project use is reliable or not. Is that the only? There were no conclusions drawn from your example? (talk) I That's a presumptuous remark, i will dispute contradicting facts in reliable sources, if they are number of sources disputing the claim, not to deviate on the subject on hand, i changed it into Amharic speakers by region, you're welcome. I assume you didn't just accuse me of misleading everyone? It's in the language section now, you can clarify it yourself. 86.89.46.70 (talk) 14:18, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 163#Joshuaproject.net and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 27#Is Joshua Project reliable?. I can ask for further input at the RSN if you'd like? Cordless Larry (talk) 15:30, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Importance of Slavery section

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)

@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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

@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)

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)

@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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

@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)

@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 [15] and Ulrich Braukämper [16] 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" [17]. 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 [18]. 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 [19]. 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)

@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)

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)

@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)

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)

As I think I already commented above, there's no reason why it can't be discussed in multiple articles, in different levels of detail. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:15, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

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

References

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

I support your proposal EthiopianHabesha Tegeistfekre (talk) 11:54, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Feast days

I am in no position to edit this article (not knowledgeable enough), but I am pretty sure that the feast days mentioned in the religion section are a misspell: should be fast days or days of fasting or something along those lines. In fact Kapuściński mentions it in his book 'The Emperor: Downfall of an Autocrat' Zapeterset (talk) 19:51, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

Joshua Project

I have removed the Joshua Project statistics from this article, because multiple discussions have concluded that they are not reliable. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Archive 7#Blanking of links, Talk:South Korea/Archive 5#Ethnic group statistics from Joshua Project and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 163#Joshuaproject.net, for example. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:48, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

US population

There reference used for the US population is actually the number of Amharic speakers. This significantly inflates the number of Amharas living in the US as the educational system in Ethiopia (-1995) and Eritrea (1952-1991) was only given in Amharic and English. Furthermore, Amharic serves as a lingua franca in Ethiopia. It is like saying anybody who speaks English is English. Turtlewong (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Slavery

It is inappropriate for slavery to be a part of this ethnic group article. There is no mention of slavery or other human rights abuses on British people, German people, or French people. Furthermore, only a fraction of Amharas held slaves and slavery is not specific to Amhara culture as it was practiced in a similar form around East Africa and the Red Sea. Turtlewong (talk) 16:34, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Support for freedom of Amhara people

Digging and collacting historical documents, scriptures about old Amhara provinces before eighteen century and construct the freedom of Amhara people in Ethiopia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.156.115.216 (talk) 15:22, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Here are the sources. The sources were not copied properly in the previous post: Amharas are Cushitic Peoples not Semitic peoples

Amharas are Cushitic Peoples not Semitic peoples (stop spreading scientific racism):

Amharas and Tigray-Tigrinyas are not Semitic peoples, this is a biased relic of the pseudoscientific study of race biology that still persists in most Western Academic Literature in regard towards Africans in general and Horn Africans specifically. Semites = Middle Easterners and most-if-not-all Arabized Peoples. On the topic of Traditionally Ethiosemitic-language speaking peoples are Cushities not Semites, please read the Cushitic peoples talk page ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cushitic_peoples ) that explains the Cushitic vs. Semitic Categorization of Habeshas (It's much better for y'all to read it than me retyping/Copy & Pasting it here.

--- Based on this evidence, a number of experts embrace a theory first stated by European scholars Edward Ullendorff and Carlo Conti Rossini that they are the original inhabitants of much of the northern Ethiopian Highlands, and were either forced out of their original settlements or assimilated by Semitic-speaking Tigrayans and Amharas.[2] This theory is further strengthened by the existence of a Cushitic substratum in Ethiopian Semitic languages indicating population assimilation of an ancient migration from Southwest Arabia.[3][4][5] Ethiopian scholars specializing in Ethiopian Studies such as Messay Kebede and Daniel E. Alemu generally disagree with this theory arguing that the migration was one of reciprocal exchange, if it even occurred at all.

Kebede states the following; This is not to say that events associated with conquest, conflict and resistance did not occur. No doubt, they must have been frequent. But the crucial difference lies in the propensity to present them, not as the process by which an alien majority imposed its rule but as part of an ongoing struggle of native forces competing for supremacy in the region. The elimination of the alien ruler indigenize Ethiopian history in terms of local actors.

Sources: Kebede, Messay (2003). "Eurocentrism and Ethiopian Historiography: Deconstructing Semitization". University of Dayton. International Journal of Ethiopian Studies. Tsehai Publishers. 1: 1–19 – via JSTOR.

Alemu, Daniel E. (2007). "Re-imagining the Horn". African Renaissance. 4 (1): 56–64 – via Ingenta.

(I had some trouble on formatting the sources properly).

Here are the sources, there was a formatting error in copying the sources. I was being honest about what I said earlier. Our history is being whitewashed. HoAHabesha (talk) 03:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Here are the sources, there was a formatting error in copying the sources. I was being honest about what I said earlier. Our history is being whitewashed. HoAHabesha (talk) 03:55, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by HoAHabesha (talk • contribs)

References

Are you able to quote a pertinent passage (including page number) that verifies your claims? Remember that Wikipedia represents the consensus in the scholarship, even if that results in historical distortions. But minority views should also be represented, though not to the same extent. The question is to what extent your position represents such a consensus in the scholarship, or failing that, a sufficiently substantive minority view (i.e. not pseudoscience). Then, there's the question to what extent you can gain the consensus for that position on Wikipedia proper. But let's first start with some direct quotes and go from there. El_C 04:07, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I read your comment more closely. If, indeed, the scholarly consensus is split — we can mention that, too. I don't know enough about this area of study. Perhaps you should launch a Request for comment to get more outside input, and hopefully, some experts that could elucidate the status of the scholarly consensus regarding this. Because, myself, I am not able to tell. El_C 04:13, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

For example, you can write something along the lines of: although the general view in Western scholarship is that Amhara people are semitic, there is a resurgence among African scholars who argue that they are, in fact, Cushitic. Something like that. If that is, indeed, the reality. Again, I'm unable to tell at this time, myself. El_C 04:18, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

That sounded way much better than before but say Ethiopian or Horn African scholars (Africa isn't a monolith). Plus at this point it does look like this Wikipedia article is taking the side of Europe over the indigenous people. HoAHabesha (talk) 04:22, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

It's certainly a strong possibility, as Wikipedia suffers from systemic bias. Again, if there is, indeed, a split in the pertinent scholarship, we should definitely aim to fairly represent it. El_C 04:30, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it's a possibility and Africa is anything but a monolith - the problem is that it would be original research for us to state it. Doug Weller talk 08:37, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

overly partisan

The second paragraph"Some Scholars have classified the Tigrayans and the Amhara as Abyssinians proper under an ultra-neo-conservative definition of Habesha identity postulated by a few Western scholars and Ethiopian ethno-nationalist political parties but not widely accepted by the general public or by most indigenous scholars of the region" seems overly partisan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.29.176.133 (talk) 04:25, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Concerning the article "disputed ethnic classification of amhara

This particular article i and every amhara reject deny the existence of amhara people as an ethnic group which is false conclusion spread by rival ethnics who are out trashing the people of amhara and there is an ongoing tension in ethiopia targeting amhara ethnics by denying their existence and killing the peoples consider themselves as amhara so please reconsider your review,as i told you there an active and ongoing genocidal massacre targeting this groups in Ethiopia you can use the #amharagenocide on twitter to see the the atrocities that are happening to this ethnic groups.....plus there are millions of people who identify themselves as an amhara and disheartens the people of this ethnic group when this article depicts them as rootless people. Last but not least amhara as distinct ethnic group is recognized by the FDRE so this particular article diminish the peoples identity nd try to push the agend of denying amhara existance thank you. Habeshan negus (talk) 07:42, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia of published knowledge, meaning that information on a subject is included when it is supported by reliable published sources. When other reliable published sources disagree, then this information is also included in Wikipedia. What is not included is information that is based on hearsay, or original research; in the same way, existing well-sourced information on Wikipedia is not removed because it is not liked by some editors, or because it goes against presupposed ideas based on hearsay or original research. In the current case, the paragraphs that you want to remove are well sourced. Donald Levine and Takkele Taddese are respected scholars that published their ideas in academically reputable venues. So it is no question that this information is absolutely legitimate; you cannot just remove it. It may be possible to balance it by published reliable sources that disagree with Levine and Takkele, if these exist. It will be your responsibility to provide citations of such sources - remember that these sources need to be reliable in order to warrant the inclusion of balancing text.

On the matter at hand, I'd like to encourage you to not adhere to such a bleak interpretation of what Levine and Takkele wrote. They are both not enemies of the Amharas, but are stating historical observations about how the Amhara people were named in historical sources. It is certainly in line with the fact that Amharas identified themselves more with core Ethiopian culture than with lower-level identities. Levine states that in earlier stages of history it was mainly other ethnic groups that applied the name Amhara in an ethnic sense to people who called themselves Ethiopians. Now, of course, in the climate of increasing ethnic nationalism, Amharas are discovering their ethnic identity as opposed to other Ethiopians, and readily apply the name to themselves. Stating all this by no means denigrates the Amharas as a people, and it was never meant to be that way by Levine or Takkele. It is not possible to apply revisionist history on Wikipedia, against the existing sources, just because it better fits the changing narratives of some of the readers/editors. Please do not attempt to remove this information again, as this will be reverted immediately, and may result in sanctions because of disruptive editing. Instead, find reliable sources that support the point of view that Amharas have always had an Amharic ethnic identity, and then this information can be included to balance what Levine and Takkele have said. Landroving Linguist (talk) 11:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

What's core Ethiopian culture???there is no core Ethiopian culture. Ethiopia is made up of different nation and nationality who have different kind of identity and culture....and the tradition that amhara refer themselves by their region comes only during zemen mesfanit(era of princes in the late 18thc century) which can alse been seen in tigray too where they were divide as (tembien,enderta,adwa nd agame) and as donald levin claimed shewan amharas considered other ethnic in shewa as more close to them can also be applied to other ethnic group who were living in that area in that time for eg.the oromos and gurage that were in present in shewa also think they were more related to shewa amhara more than other oromos and gurage that live in other region,as i see,either you are here trying to break the unity of the people of amhara and pushing an evil idea,by dividing them on to d/f regions or wrongly mistaken for accepting a white european and partisian view of the people,i believe if you should get in touch with the more plausbile reality that is on ground of ethiopia before you try hard to dig some dividing unproven,unverfied out of touch and far from reality study in an effort to cast doubt on the peoples existance plus you just can't put it suddenly as factual thing,just because it support your agenda there are million of studies that also claim amharas cleansed 5million people of other ethnicity that were written by white people and accepted by ethno politicians are you gonna post them too??you just cant put it because it support your agenda...you also wrote an unproven shady claim that amharas refer themselves as an Ethiopian not as amhara which is very false claim but you try depcit it as truth!!!and i don't really get the idea why did you want to put such article in this page at this time other than that you have covert mission to divide this people or present them as rootless people or other shady thing just like the italians who spread false info the eve of the 2nd ethio-italo war,where they depicit amhara ethnicity as an oppresser and carnage on other nations nationalities that live in Ethiopia ....there is no reason you can put this study as something that represent amhara in this page you may put it as "see also" but that is also very unnecessary and rude to the people who were nd will be idntifyinh by amhara only ,plus it can not be presented as some thing that must be noted when the federal government of Ethiopia recognize it as a distinct ethnicity with distinct language,culture,custome,and tradition different from other nationalities,i suggest you to back off before posting some disputed claim that's not accepted by the people. Habeshan negus (talk) 18:42, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Apparently you have not read what I have written. First, I did not insert the paragraph there, I just resist its deletion. Second, I have no personal opinion whatsoever about the ethnic identity of the Amhara people, and certainly no agenda about it, neither overt nor hidden. I am just explaining the rules of Wikipedia to you. If it is published in a reliable source, it stands. If it is not published in a reliable source, we delete it. So heed my advice to find reliable sources that support your claim, and that position can be included. Whether what is written in Wikipedia offends some of its readers is entirely beside the point - almost anything may offend the feelings of somebody, particularly of people who are very quick to assume bad faith and evil agendas. Believe me, none of this is present here. Please, again, do not remove material from Wikipedia just because you don't like it, particularly after receiving several warnings that this is against Wikipedia's rules. If you continue, this will almost certainly lead to sanctions. Landroving Linguist (talk) 22:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I was a bit concerned that this section was only based on two sources, one of which is a conference paper, and that it might be WP:UNDUE. However, I did manage to find some more sources on this issue and have added a sentence based on one of them. The section could still do with work to improve it though, in my view. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:49, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

I've added a few more sources to try to give more of a sense of different perspectives on this issue. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:31, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

About The disputed ethinc clasification

The the disputed ethinc classification on amhara wikipedia page is unnecessary,unsubstantiated,one sided and higly controversial article that need to be removed and its fairly recent addition by ethnocentric politicians who want to undermine the people of amhara...given that the ethnic tensions in ethiopia this needs to be removed and it's not backed by a resourceful and neutral point of view and it undermine the peoples identity!!! Amdetsion the conqueror (talk) 08:52, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Infobox pictures

Currently there is an edit war going on about the inclusion of logos for each religion in the infobox. FengYuxiang24 wants to include them, and ProKro doesn't. So far I watched the reverts with fascination, but as ProKro today proclaimed that one should, "as per Infobox Manual of Style, avoid images in infoboxes", I went through the trouble to check the Infobox MOS. I couldn't find any stipulation in there that supports ProKro's claim, so I would be obliged if ProKro could point us to the exact location in the MOS where such a statement is made. Indeed, I see infoboxes full of flags all over Wikipedia, and therefore I would be quite surprised if such a regulation really exists, or that, if it exists, it is that blatantly and widely ignored. The pictures in question here are of about the same size as inline flags, so I would be absolutely willing the accept them here, unless I am convinced that they are indeed a breach of the MOS. Landroving Linguist (talk) 19:51, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

WP:INFOBOXFLAG might be what you're looking for. That refers mainly to national flags, but I think it probably applies to this situation too. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:33, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I didn't see that, and it explains what I have been asking above. Based on that I think I can agree to keep the logos out of the infobox. Landroving Linguist (talk) 21:03, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Link to Gelila Bekele

The link to Gelila Bekele in the noteables points to Tyler Perry and needs to be corrected. 72.228.60.201 (talk) 16:06, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Fringe theory is being pushed/promoted on the Amhara wikipedia page!

86.89.46.70 (talk) 23:58, 22 November 2020 (UTC) I'm calling for experts to look on the Amhara page. A fringe theory based on just 2 or 3 scholars & journalists are being pushed to question the ethnic classification and the existence of millions of people. The government of Ethiopia recognizes Amharas as a ethnic group(second largest), with their own region. Amharas have centuries of history, language & culture. I'm calling for experts to weigh in, Don't let wikipedia be a platform to disparage certain ethnic groups pages. 86.89.46.70 (talk) 23:58, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Dear Habeshan negus, you've been warned before that using more than one account is not acceptable on Wikipedia. This includes making edits without an account. As to the matter at hand - the points that you are objecting to are well sourced using reliable secondary sources, and as such they deserve to be included in the article. If there are similarly reputable sources making different claims, then these should also be mentioned in the article, and the differing points of view should be balanced against each other. It is not up to one IP-user to decide whether a theory is fringe or mainstream; this should be settled according to a consensus of the editors of a page, based on the quality of the given sources. Landroving Linguist (talk) 08:36, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

I'd also add that the article overall treats Amhara people as an ethnic group. The amount of coverage of arguments from sources that dispute this is quite small in proportion to the overall size of the article. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:41, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

User:Landroving Linguist You are falsely accusing me to someone else,where is the penalty for false accusations? It's obviously that i'm not the only who see this disparaging section of the article. I don't know the ins & out of Wikipedia. But who said you can't make edits without a account, and if not why does Wikipedia allow it? I call on wikipedia admins, editorial experts to look at this page. Don't let fringe theories disparage this article and this people group 09:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC)86.89.46.70 (talk)

Dear 86.89.46.70, if you are indeed not Habeshan negus, then I have falsely accused you of using more than one account - please accept my sincere apologies! This may explain why you have not seen the discussion further up on this talkpage, where all the arguments have already been exchanged. Landroving Linguist (talk) 16:26, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

talk Give me a break Larry, i take one look at this page. There's a HUGE section that questions the existence of millions people culture, language & history. Based on only a few statements by 2 or 3 journalist or a scholar. Nobody can overlook this section, it questions all the rest of the article. I call on wikipedia admins, editorial experts to look at this page. Don't let fringe theories disparage this article and this people group86.89.46.70 (talk) 09:42, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

The section isn't questioning the existence of people at all; it's merely reflecting the fact that there is scholarly debate about the nature of Amhara people as a group, drawing on multiple sources (more than two or three). No doubt it could be improved but the journals are peer reviewed and respected and Wikipedia is not censored. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:26, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

This whole argument stands testament to the fact that while this section may have accurately reflected scholarly consensus when it was written, but is now indisputably outdated. 10 or even 5 years ago, more Amharas identified with historic provincial identities (Gojame, Wolloye, Shewan, Gondere, etc), and pan-Ethiopian identity, than any ethnic identity. So, for instance, Amharas in North Shewa generally felt a greater affinity with Oromos in West and Central Shewa than "fellow Amharas" in Gonder. But this has clearly changed in recent years, and Amhara ethnic nationalism, which was historically "underdeveloped" compared to other ethnic nationalisms in Ethiopia, has seen explosive growth. As a result, more people now identify as ethnic Amharas, and statements like "there is no intra-Amhara ethnic consciousness" are now just plain false. I would note conversely that the ideas expressed in that section-- that there was no real Amhara identity separate from Ethiopian identity, that the markers of Amhara identity were the same thing as normative Ethiopian identity-- are in fact what is often denounced as "Amhara chauvinism" in Ethiopian political discourse, and this, at least in my view, betrays the fact this shift is a result of the ethnic federalist system which makes ethnicity the sole legitimate organizing principle of politics (hence leaving people without explicity ethnic identities at a disadvantage), but I digress. For more reading on the rise of Amhara ethnic nationalism I can suggest the following:

• • The birth of Amhara nationalism
  • ‘Amhara Politicians’ and Amhara Nationalism: A bumpy road and an evolving agonizing process
  • What is the point in Amhara nationalism?
  • Ethnic nationalism and the Gondar protests
  • Ethiopia: Defining Amhara nationalism for a better country --Varavour (talk) 21:11, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for this valuable input, Varavour. I look forward to seeing updates to reflect this. In the meantime, I've changed the section heading, which I already thought was a bit POV, and have added some publication dates to the in-text attributions to give more of a sense of when these debates were happening. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:42, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Notes & References

Short: I think the notes and references should be differentiated more formally according to the style described on the Help:Shortened footnotes page.

I just consolidated three of the citations leading to the 2000 edition of the David Lavine book. I used an inline page citation format. However, I think it would be improved if the frequently-cited books would appear under the References section, allowing the Notes section to have shortened and unique references. I feel pretty confident that I can make this happen. However, if someone can point me to a slightly clearer definition of format, that would be helpful.DrMichaelWright (talk) 09:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

There are also three references to 'Beshah'. I presume this is Girma Beshah of Addis Ababa university, but that is really just a guess. I don't know which book or article this might be in reference to.DrMichaelWright (talk) 09:38, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Edit request

I saw a sourced argument on the existence of Amharan Ethnicity, their origins and historical document of Amharan self-identification. Allow me to restore those edits who has been reverted. Gharoc (talk) 20:37, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Before you do this, please see the discussion above, and understand why some edits had to be reverted according to Wikipedia regulations. If you choose to not follow these regulations, your edits will also be reverted for the same reasons. Otherwise, your edits will be most welcome. Landroving Linguist (talk) 21:58, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

I have read the suggested writings and I still demand to be authorized to edit since I believe I can improve the article which is highly derogative to the referred ethnicity. Gharoc (talk) 13:08, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

There is no such process of authorisation, Gharoc. While the article is semi-protected, if your account status doesn't enable you to edit it then you need to follow the instructions at WP:SILVERLOCK to make specific edit requests here on its talk page. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:29, 28 December 2020 (UTC)