Talk:Haiti/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Policy on italicising non-English geographic features

I've been editing the Geography section and noticed that some of the French-named features are italicised, others not. Is there a Wikipedia standard that is used for this? Sdrawkcab (talk) 18:13, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Judaism

Not in citation given. There are no Jews in Haiti. Remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.0.19 (talk) 05:00, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi - the Jewish Haitians are discussed further at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Haiti#Judaism & https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Haiti . They seem to be an extremely small community nowadays but still worth a mention given their interesting history. WisDom-UK (talk) 22:27, 20 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 November 2019

change "Charles Leclerc" link to redirect to "Charles Leclerc (general)" in section 2.2.3 72.10.156.157 (talk) 04:12, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

 Done Thank you, Dawnseeker2000 04:21, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2020

This sentence is poorly worded:

Change "Genetic studies show that some of these groups, some were related to the Yanomami of the Amazon Basin."

to

"Genetic studies show that some of these groups were related to the Yanomami of the Amazon Basin." Sregorj (talk) 02:21, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 06:58, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 January 2020

Us Haitians are ARAWAKS pronounced AHUUUUAK Indians NOT "Taino. Taino was a languange. There is a lot of bullshit and misinformation in this article as it was obviously written by people who are not "Haitian" and have no idea what they are talking about. It's offensive to those of us who know our true "his" story. This is why Wikipedia is not respected as a reliable source for information. 162.192.199.243 (talk) 08:19, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. EvergreenFir (talk) 08:41, 25 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2020

Please change "Much of this is rotted in Haitian Vodou tradition" to "Much of this is rooted in Haitian Vodou tradition" because the word "rooted" was spelled wrong. 96.37.34.153 (talk) 20:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

 Done Thank you! Dawnseeker2000 21:10, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 February 2020

• In the Duvalier dynasty (1957–1986) section: Change "He largely continue his father's policies" to "He largely continued his father's policies"
• In the Duvalier dynasty (1957–1986) section: Change "Massive corruption and the brain-drain of skilled Haitians retarded the country's development" to "Massive corruption and the brain-drain of skilled Haitians reversed the country's development" The Meta Boi (talk) 16:45, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

 Partly done: Fixed the typo but did not change "retarded" to "reversed". That statement is currently not supported with any citation and we should have some source to tell us if the economic growth slowed or stopped before choosing between these terms. The text above implies that there was some growth during Baby Doc's reign, so a source is needed to decide which statement is accurate. I placed a citation needed tag instead. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:28, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Jacmel Seaside.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:37, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 July 2019

Change the status of the current prime minister:

Jean-Henry Céant

to

Jean-Michel Lapin

with a link to the page: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Michel_Lapin Sczyz (talk) 22:45, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

 Done Sam Sailor 08:01, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

I’m new and I’m still learning. Why is this semi-protected? I don’t see an explanation. Fat Irish Guy (talk) 17:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

About Franklin Roosevelt and the Haitian constitution

In 1920, FDR was the VP running mate of James M. Cox. In that capacity he stumped the country, including giving a Farmer's Day speech in Deer Lodge, Montana (my home town). In that speech he claimed to have written the Haitian constitution, as this article asserts. My previous research indicated that he never made such a bold assertion before, or after since the reaction forced him to walk back his claim. So, although in his 1915 capacity as assistant secretary of the Navy he no doubt had a good deal to do with that document, it is at best arguable that he actually wrote it.Jwilsonjwilson (talk) 20:40, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 October 2020

Change the link for Elizabeth McAlister's "Madonna of 15th Street" to this more accurate link: https://digitalcollections.wesleyan.edu/object/relifp-46 Cambria.weaver (talk) 23:06, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 16:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 October 2020

Wrstout (talk) 23:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

The article claims Haiti is the only nation in history established by a successful slave revolt. This is incorrect, as the original nation of Israel was established by a successful slave revolt of the Hebrew people who were slaves in Egypt. this is historically correct whether or not one believes the biblical accounts of miracles leading to their freedom.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Dawnseeker2000 23:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 December 2020

First appearance of the word CARICOM in the article should be the active link for/directing to the article on CARICOM itself rather than the word's second appearance (CARICOM is mentioned twice in the article) PJayCaribe (talk) 06:32, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

 Done Terasail^[✉] 22:36, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Piktograf1.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:16, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

poverty is the reason they're poor?

Under the economy section "poverty" is listed as one of the principal reasons that Haiti is such a poor country. That would seem to obvious to mention to me. "Poverty" should be deleted, because an effect cannot have itself as a cause. 107.77.221.22 (talk) 15:36, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

 Done (CC) Tbhotch^™ 21:12, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Religion in Haiti

Should the section on religion in Haiti include reference to the saying "Haiti is 70& Catholic, 30% Protestant and 100% Vodou? Rollo August (talk) 21:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Presidential Assassination and the amount of coups

In the government and politics part of the page, it says "Haiti has suffered 32 coups" but now with the president assassinated the number should go up to 33. Now the assassination of the president is not a coup per se but still the people of Haiti have once again got rid of a leader before he could finish his term properly. BrianLyons314 (talk) 00:17, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

citing multiple sources

@Aquillion: What's the problem with citing multiple sources, as long as they are different?

Are there any more than the usual questions of reliability of the two sources cited for the NYPD training Haitian police?

• "NYPD officers train Haitian police". USA Today. Associated Press. 17 November 2014. Retrieved 20 April 2015.

• Weiss, Murray, ed. (21 January 2011). "NYPD to help train Haitian police". New York Post. Retrieved 20 April 2015.

I think it's useful to have multiple references like this. Sometimes a link goes dead. And in most cases, the details reported will be different.

On the other hand, I don't think we need separate notes. Rather than delete the reference to the New York Post, I added it after the reference to USA Today in the same note.

If you disagree, please explain why. Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 22:13, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Per WP:RSP, the New York Post is not a reliable source. We should replace it with higher-quality sources whenever possible. If you want multiple sources I'll just find an additional one, but I'm generally opposed to citing the Post (or other generally-unreliable sources) in any situation where we can avoid it; citing a weak or unreliable source weakens the credibility of the article as a whole, even if we do it alongside better sources. Note the RSP entry: There is consensus that the New York Post is generally unreliable for factual reporting especially with regard to politics, particularly New York City politics. A tabloid newspaper, editors criticise its lack of concern for fact-checking or corrections, including a number of examples of outright fabrication. Editors consider the New York Post more reliable in the period before it changed ownership in 1976, and particularly unreliable for coverage involving the New York City Police Department. This is definitely a situation where we should avoid citing it. --Aquillion (talk) 23:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. That's helpful. I looked for something like that before replying to you and didn't find it.

However, I think that analysis is a reason we should cite such an article, while also citing that analysis:

If someone wants to cite the New York Post (or any other questionable source) for anything, I think the best policy would be to have a discussion about how that source compares with others on the particular issue at hand, while citing not just that summary but also something that documents that concern in more detail.

I could use suggestions on the best approach to try to reopen a discussion on this Wikipedia policy.

I'm a US citizen, and I have some tragic personal history driving my concerns: I spent 6 years in the US Air Force during the Vietnam War. I went into the military believing it was my patriotic duty. I had been on active duty roughly 3 months, when it came to me that the South Vietnamese should have a "home team" advantage. Why did they need foreign troops, when their enemies, the Viet Cong, did not? Whether or not this is an accurate characterization of that conflict, it was my perception at the time, and I was not happy with what I was being ordered to do: I could either obey orders or go to prison -- or maybe Canada.

Around 1995 it came to me that there should be something to be learned from the spectacular collapse of the Soviet Bloc almost without firing a shot that I was not hearing. After a decade of study, I self-published a summary of my research on this as Spencer Graves (26 February 2005), The Impact of Violent and Nonviolent Action on Constructed Realities and Conflict (PDF), prodsyse.com, Wikidata Q58635572.

In 2005 I finally got a copy of Dwight D. Eisenhower (1963), Mandate for Change: The White House Years 1953-1956: A Personal Account, Doubleday, Wikidata Q61945939. On p. 372, Eisenhower, who had been president of the US in 1954, wrote, "I have never talked or corresponded with any person knowledgeable in Indochinese affairs [including Vietnam], who did not agree that had elections been held as of the time of the fighting [leading to the defeat of the French in 1954], possibly 80 per cent of the population would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh". This was the universal expert consensus that was not even mentionable in the mainstream media in the US in that day. This suggests to me that Eisenhower, President of the US in 1954, understood that he might not be reelected in November 1956 if Ho Chi Minh had won an election there six months earlier. So he made sure that no honest elections were held there. The three presents who succeeded Eisenhower (Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon) all, I think, felt similarly constrained.

For a similar analysis of the War on Terror, see Wikiversity:Winning the War on Terror.

A couple of months ago, I made a presentation at this year's Military Operations Research Society Symposium, proposing an "Wikiversity:International Conflict Observatory", where I discuss how we need to build bridges to common understanding. Wikipedia is known to be a place where people with very different perspectives collaborate to produce descriptions of issues that all sides can more or less live with. When we refuse to cite sources that other people find credible, we cut off communications. That becomes an obstacle to understanding, amplifying conflict and political polarization. That's the exact opposite of what we need, and the opposite of what the Wikimedia system is otherwise capable of achieving.

Adam Grant (2 February 2021), Think Again: The Power of Knowing What You Don't Know, OL 34167132M, Wikidata Q107693279 is a brand new book that summarizes research in how to build understanding. This includes asking questions and being more tentative in our analyses. Deleting references that other people may find credible can have the opposite effect.

In sum, I think we need to engage people who support questionable sources like the New York Post in a respectful dialogue to the maximum extent feasible. I think this means having civil, respectful discussions about what we can say and what we can't on Talk pages, and summarizing the disagreements in notes to references.

In particular, I think it is unwise and contrary to the mission of Wikipedia to delete references, because some group of editors have decided the said source in not reliable.

Suggestions? Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 02:09, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

"de Sable"

The last name of Jean-Baptiste Point de Sable is Point de Sable (sand point), and should not be shortened to "de Sable" anymore than McDonald should be shortened to Donald. 76.69.87.99 (talk) 17:34, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 July 2021

Under the section 'personal income' there is a mistake in the writing. The sentence right now is "In 2004, 80% or ore of college graduates from Haiti were living abroad." This should be changed to "In 2004, 80% or more of college graduates from Haiti were living abroad." Der BigChungus (talk) 11:56, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done Girth Summit _(blether) 13:05, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

−== Changing "richest" to "most profitable" ==

The second paragraph of this article ends with:

"French colonists established lucrative sugarcane plantations, worked by vast numbers of slaves brought from Africa, which made the colony one of the richest in the world." (Own emphasis)

I urge that someone with permission to edit this article replace "richest" with "most profitable" wherever it is used to describe colonial Haiti - this avoids possible confusion about the status of the wealth; namely that it was exported abroad to Europe. The conditions of the colony for the vast majority of the people there was of horrific destitution, it wasn't "rich" at all, as is clearly stated elsewhere in this article.

I urge this revision be made elsewhere where "richest" is used to refer to the wealth generated in colonial Haiti.

e.g. "The French set about creating sugar and coffee plantations, worked by vast numbers of slaves imported from Africa, and Saint-Domingue grew to become their """richest""" colonial possession." (Own emphasis)

If anyone disagrees I am more than willing to listen, but I think this small semantic change better reflects the truth of the matter.

You're damn right. 76.69.87.99 (talk) 17:36, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

earthquake casualties

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Haiti_earthquake says 2248 dead, which is a lot less than 250,000!

2010 Haiti earthquake ≠ 2021 Haiti earthquake. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 16:56, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Relevant Section:

2.3.3 Unification of Hispaniola

Existing Sentence:

Although the amount of the reparations was reduced to 90 million in 1838, by 1900 80% of the country's gross domestic product was being spent on debt repayment and the country did not finish repaying it until 1947.

Suggested Revision:

Although the amount of the reparations was reduced to 90 million in 1838, by 1900 80% of Haiti's government spending was debt repayment and the country did not finish repaying it until 1947.

Rationale:

The currently cited guardian article states "By 1900, Haiti was spending about 80% of its national budget on loan repayments." The article is saying the 80% of government spending was going towards debt repayment, not 80% of GDP. 80% of GDP would imply that 80% of all spending in the country was going towards the loans which would not be possible.:

Reference:

Henley, Jon (14 January 2010) The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/14/haiti-history-earthquake-disaster

Imperialistt (talk) 02:56, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

References

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:34, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2021

'where is the sentence : the First Black Republic & How Haiti change the world by abolishing slavery''''Bold text 173.166.76.17 (talk) 14:41, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:46, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of "Template:Largest cities of Haiti"

Template:Largest cities of Haiti has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 10:37, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Louismd.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:59, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Julia9114.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 August 2018 and 22 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): R.rwoerz.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Pdl272.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 January 2022

I want edit 188.151.173.112 (talk) 10:24, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. Cannolis (talk) 10:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2022

Please change the following: “The French set about creating sugar and coffee plantations, worked by vast numbers of slaves imported from Africa, and Saint-Domingue grew to become their richest colonial possession.[58][20]” To the following: “The French set about creating sugar and coffee plantations, worked by vast numbers of slaves kidnapped from Africa, and Saint-Domingue grew to become their richest colonial possession.[58][20]”

Humans are not, and have never been an import or export. Thank you. 2603:7000:A806:5F1D:C589:3F67:37F6:865C (talk) 22:57, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Humans have absolutely been imported and exported. That is exactly what slave trade was. Slaves were sold and purchased just like any other good, so unfortunately the description fits.  Not done. Bsoyka (talk) 23:14, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 June 2022

Haiti has a new armed forces and it had gotten established back in 2017 and the current National police (PHN) has over 15k members but isn't that funded. 2601:586:CB00:96E0:4902:C7D8:777D:CED0 (talk) 17:01, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:14, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Incorrect information about first European settlement

The article alleges: "Columbus subsequently founded the first European settlement in the Americas, La Navidad, on what is now the northeastern coast of Haiti." Not true. The first European settlement was Norse, hundreds of years earlier: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%27Anse_aux_Meadows The statement needs to be amended to be in line with the facts. 69.55.218.4 (talk) 14:53, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC POSTION

Isn't the Dominican Republic East of Haiti??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.178.3.172 (talk) 11:13, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Yes: The Dominican Republic is the eastern 5/8 of the island of Hispaniola; Haiti is the western 3/8.

Is there something in this article that suggests anything different?

DavidMCEddy (talk) 13:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

Haiti and Polynesia?

@BGetmefood: Please explain how the reference you cited has anything to do with Haiti. I cannot find "Haiti" nor "Carib" in that article:

"Hawaii canoe to visit St Helena on Round-the-world voyage". Saint Helena.gov.sh. 4 January 2016.

Your claim seems inconsistent with the succeeding section on ""Pre-Columbian history", which begins, "The island of Hispaniola ... has been inhabited since about 5000 BC by groups of Native Americans thought to have arrived from Central or South America." That seems to contradict your Polynesian claim.

Please desist from making this change again without a stronger reference. Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 01:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

@BGetmefood: You have made the same edit four times. The above request for explanation was posted after the second time. You have not responded to it but continue to repost it. I am reverting it for the fourth time. DavidMCEddy (talk) 12:51, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

The content is clearly not supported by the source, and should not be put back. I think a report at WP:ANI or WP:AN3 would be appropriate. Femke (talk) 15:57, 2 August 2022 (UTC)

A weird wording.

The article says:

() Haitians were bludgeoned and bayoneted, then herded into the sea, ()

So, dead people were herded into the sea? This is impossible because a dead person neither understands nor obeys orders. My proposal is to replace "herded" with "thrown". 85.193.215.210 (talk) 19:29, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Section 2.2.1 & 2.2.2 dates of when spanish/french colonial rule switched over

in the titles it says spain ruled from 1492-1625 and france from 1625-1804 but in the actual body text it only makes reference to the Treaty of Ryswick of 1697, implying it was spanish in (1492-1697) then french (1697-1804) 67.21.158.14 (talk) 20:30, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Bus Service Section needs to be edited

The "Bus Service" section doesn't make any sense and I can't edit it as I don't understand what the writer is trying to say. Also, the whole section has been copied word for word from Haiti Libre (see link in the section. An example of the section:

Under the metal body of "The Haitian pride," a 300-hp diesel engine and chassis doubled. And, for better visibility, a rear view camera for the controls of driver. Manufactured from the assembly of parts purchased abroad, the bus is equipped with, among other things with, televisions, sound system, custom lamps, window laminated four whose four for exit, sanitary facilities, 54 individual reclining seats, to ensure relaxation, security and comfort of travelers.

Can anyone help with this?

Ellie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.60.63 (talk) 14:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Haiti Product Exports (2019).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:05, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2023

gainst = against 2603:8000:D300:D0F:2931:A6A7:3D47:5C8E (talk) 03:24, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done Dawnseeker2000 03:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

La Navidad wasn’t the first European settlement in America

Vinland - settled by the Norse - was to my knowledge the first time Europeans settled (built housing) in the Americas. I suggest it should be changed to “the first successful (this is up to debate) European settlement…” 2A00:23EE:2210:4E39:A52D:50DF:4C66:B01D (talk) 19:19, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2023

Beginning of the third paragraph, "maroons" has an existing page that is not linked to. This is the first instance of the term in the article.

Change

"In the midst of the French Revolution (1789–99), slaves, maroons, and free people of color"

to

"In the midst of the French Revolution (1789–99), slaves, maroons, and free people of color" Mark20044 (talk) 16:30, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:05, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 October 2023 (2)

Section: "French rule (1625–1804)", last paragraph.

Change "Maroons" to "maroons". The existing article, as well as the other source below, do not treat the term as a proper noun so it should not be capitalized.

Additionally, the citation for the term is out of date; the Encyclopaedia Britannica article on Haiti does not use the term. Suggest changing it to the page on the maroon community: https://www.britannica.com/topic/maroon-community Mark20044 (talk) 16:47, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

• Creating a new section as this is essentially a different edit request. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:02, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done Pinchme123 (talk) 13:59, 6 October 2023 (UTC)