Talk:Buganda

Africa: Uganda High‑importance

	Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject AfricaTemplate:WikiProject AfricaAfrica articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Uganda portal This article is supported by WikiProject Uganda (assessed as Mid-importance).

Former countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles

Which districts?

The article should state which modern-day districts of Uganda comprise the Buganda region. Badagnani 03:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clan names

Are the original six clan names really: Boom boom Bang bang dip dip nta, or has someone been playing with the edit features? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.105.119.118 (talk) 06:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Social structure

Does the information provided apply to the Baganda only, or to the other ethnic groups as well? And which are these other groups?--193.136.189.1 (talk) 11:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistency

When I opened this page I noticed a paragraph that didn't make sense: "In September 2009, Kayunga declared its secession from the traditional Kingdom of Buganda. The King attempted to visit but was banned by the Ugandan government, provoking riots in Kampala. [3] Kayunga district has not declared its secession from the traditional kingdom of Buganda. "The first sentence seems to completely contradict the second sentence. If anyone knows which one of those is correct, please clarify 199.46.198.230 (talk) 21:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hashed/hatched

Changed "hashed" to "hatched" in the map caption. I believe that is what the original author meant. I can find no definition for the word "hashed" which would make sense. On the other hand, "hatched" means to shade with stripes. Cheers. A1 Aardvark (talk) 20:15, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved per clear consensus. --RegentsPark (talk) 02:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Buganda kingdom → Buganda — While formally known as the Buganda Kingdom, the Ugandan kingdom is normally referred to simply as "Buganda". See various Bugandan and Ugandan newspapers (Buganda Post, Observer, Daily Monitor), international press (Guardian, Telegraph, Washington Post), UNESCO, and most books on the subject (Buganda in Modern History, The Mind of Buganda, Myth, Ritual, and Kingship in Buganda). City of Destruction (The Celestial City) 22:12, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support Unnecessary disambiguation. Buganda is already a redirect to Buganda kingdom. The only other Buganda article at present is Buganda Agreement of 1900, so there's hardly likely to be much confusion. Skinsmoke (talk) 03:20, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. It was recently moved[1] without discussion and "kingdom" an unnecessarily appendage since Buganda already redirects here anyway. I also propose other Ugandan monarchies moved without discussion be returned to their original locations including: — AjaxSmack 03:24, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have moved Ankole kingdom back to Ankole and Bunyoro kingdom back to Bunyoro. Busoga kingdom will require an administrator. Apparently the editor who made the moves thinks that the Manual of Style dictates that we should have articles titled Belgium kingdom and Denmark kingdom. It doesn't, and thankfully we don't. Skinsmoke (talk) 06:22, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. In the absence of evidence that "Buganda kingdom" is correct and commonly used, the comment above from Skinsmoke says it perfectly. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 11:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Probably also worth noting that the Constitution of Buganda refers to the territory simply as "Buganda", and does not use the word "kingdom" once within the document. City of Destruction (The Celestial City) 23:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Titles should not be needlessly burdened with clarifications. Is there another Buganda that needs to be differentiated from this Buganda? Most likely not. Green Giant (talk) 18:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Subnational kingdom?

The article mentions that Buganda is a subnational kingdom. Is that similar to an autonomous region of some countries? Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 02:28, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

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

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071129112920/http://ggwangamujje.com/content/docs/TheGandaClanSystem.pdf to http://ggwangamujje.com/content/docs/TheGandaClanSystem.pdf

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:03, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]