Talk:Dubul' ibhunu
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article is written in South African English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Lannguage
editWhat language is it? — 2dk (talk) 10:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
Dispute
edit@Alssa1 and @2603:8080:f600:14e7:609a:2a4d:ff05:48a6 , please bring your dispute here rather than revert-waring and we can try to resolve it. SP00KYtalk 19:12, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
@W1tchkr4ft 00, there has been multiple disputes I've been having with him. Alssa1 (talk) 19:16, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- I agree. I believe it is best for both of us to just drop it all.
- For this page specifically, I added a justification from Black South Africans as to why they don't consider the song anti-white. They say it is meant to be interpeted symbolically. I believe ain in depth description for one side but not the other is not accurate especially since it exists in the sources.
- Is there any reason why you don't believe this should be in the page? I'm going to try to be more open to you this time. 2603:8080:F600:14E7:609A:2A4D:FF05:48A6 (talk) 19:20, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with this edit and I will also revert it back if it is again changed, but you should not be so suprised when people make these kinds of reverts, one of the reasons i keep an eye on pages like this is to keep an eye on and revert the continuous stream of white-fragility they attract. I think you should find both somewhere else to discuss the larger interpersonal issue though with people who understand wikipedia policy. It is not good for random pages to 'catch bullets' over your guys thing. SP00KYtalk 21:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
- @W1tchkr4ft 00:
you should not be so suprised when people make these kinds of reverts, one of the reasons i keep an eye on pages like this is to keep an eye on and revert the continuous stream of white-fragility they attract.
If you continue to violate WP:NPA, you may be suspended. 2001:569:5178:e400:1811:eef0:33c5:fbc9 (talk) 03:04, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
- @W1tchkr4ft 00:
- I agree with this edit and I will also revert it back if it is again changed, but you should not be so suprised when people make these kinds of reverts, one of the reasons i keep an eye on pages like this is to keep an eye on and revert the continuous stream of white-fragility they attract. I think you should find both somewhere else to discuss the larger interpersonal issue though with people who understand wikipedia policy. It is not good for random pages to 'catch bullets' over your guys thing. SP00KYtalk 21:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Vandalism
editThis page is regularly vandalized by right-wingers. Far right accounts on twitter are preoccupied with the song and have posted about it recently which resulted in a large portion of the introductory paragraph discussing the song's "racism". There is a controversy section to discuss the controversy around the song. It is a controversial minority opinion that the song is racist, so that discussion should be relegated to the controversy section. Theobroma1917 (talk) 21:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Theobroma1917 agreed, it needs to be fixed and locked down VictoriousBard (talk) 14:42, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Afriforum lacking context
editThe organization Afriforum and their claims about the song are brought up multiple times in the article. However, important context is not provided to situate these claims. According to the Wikipedia article on Afriforum, "
Since Afriforum's claims about the song are linked to their claims about white genocide, I think this is important context to give readers. I'm unable to add this important context since the article is now, rightfully, protected. 70.105.6.144 (talk) 21:34, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- I looked into this a bit and have so far been unable to find evidence that Afriforum has made claims linking Dubul' ibhunu to the White genocide conspiracy theory. I did however find an Afriform publication listing the concept of White genocide where seems to be given as an example (along with White Monopoly Capital) of a disproven conspiracy theory.[1] I also found an article written by Afriforium deputy CEO, Ernest Roots, where he seems to argue against calling it a genocide, although largely for tactical reasons. Wherein he writes: "Combating the scourge of farm murders by attempting to have such murders recognised as genocide is an unwise strategy."[2] It would be helpful if you could provide references so that people can ascertain the proof of this accusation.--Discott (talk) 11:00, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- I just managed to find this article in Al Jazeera alleging that: "Afriforum does not use the term white genocide, but du Preez says the group is quite happy to have their members use the phrase or for them to exaggerate numbers if it helps garner support."[3] I am not so sure what do with that, this article might not be the best place for it, the article on White Genocide conspiracy theory and/or Afriforium seem like better places for its use. It is also worth pointing out that this source also quotes Afriform's leader stating that there is there is "no genocide going on." Its worth noting that stating one thing (Afriforum's members espouse the White genocide conspiracy theory) without also stating the other thing (Afriforium states that there is no genocide) might be cherry-picking.--Discott (talk) 12:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)