Talk:Ethiopians/Archive 1

Archive 1

Yhever

Great references, great work! many Thanks Ldingley 19:39, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

---

I don't mean to be a wet blanket on this article, but what is it's intent? Does it describe all of the different ethnic groups in Ethiopia? Or is it an attempt to provide an alternative narrative to History of Ethiopia -- which could stand a lot of work? I am honestly confused. -- llywrch 22:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Utterly Biased

Who writes these articles on Ethiopia?! Do you guys know how utterly biased you sound? This is throughly offensive to people of Ethiopian origin! The 'world surprised' by Italy's defeat by the Ethiopians?! It is more like the arrogant European looters who were surprised. Ethiopia has maintained an unbroken legacy of independence throughout time. Ethiopia was 'isolated' after rejecting Catholicism?! Ethiopia may have been in decline in the 17th Century, but still a significant power in the region. It's like saying France was isolated from the West for vocally opposing the U.S. war of aggression against Iraq. Europeans, as stated in the article, could not even make a trip to Ethiopia in response to the 'first' diplomatic contact initiated by Ethiopia, but came to the defense of Ethiopia?! 19th and 20th Century Eurocentric historians through Eurocenteric institutions intentionally distorted Ethiopian (African, for that matter) history to justify their own empty and barbaric past. Quite a bit of this fabricated history is being debunked, but these articles in Wikipedia continue to propagate them. Students are now quoting Wikipeidia as a source, and this is not source of any kind.Peelinglayers (talk) 22:50, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Jeez man, the old comments here really need to get archived. This nonsense doesn't belong here. It's been 15 years ballads^one 23:15, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

For the same reason as my peer above, I object to the fact that the DNA thing is brung up at all there is off no reason to bring it up in the first place. No other ethnic group is metioned like this so why should the peoples of Ethiopia be mentioned like this either it goes to undermine everything that Ethiopia stands for in the heart of Africans around the world. -Wufei05 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.9.223.205 (talk) 22:49, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Somebody needed to say that! Why is it that when we see European countries written about on Wikipedia it's about the history, food, art, etc. And when African countries are mentioned, especially Ethiopia, somebody writes about DNA links to "Caucasians" and other such non-sense? LEAVE AFRICA ALONE! HAVEN'T YOU DONE ENOUGH HARM?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.143.59 (talk) 07:22, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

At the time of this writing, I'm the only person actively writing or maintaining articles on a regular basis related to Ethiopia. Which means everything from history & culture -- such as the Battle of Adwa or Bakri Sapalo, two articles I contributed to heavily -- to referential articles on every city, town or village (right now I'm at work attempting to integrate the results of the 2007 Census into Wikipedia), to articles on the plants & animals found there -- all of that is my work. Done in the time I can steal from my work & family, & often based on books I have bought with my own money. I've ignored this article because I have no fucking idea what to do with it, as my comment above from 2006 shows. I make no defense of it, & have no idea what all of this obsession with DNA & genetics is about. (IMHO, it's obvious why the inhabitants of the Horn of Africa share genes with people living in the Arabian peninsula, or North Africa, or Eastern Africa.) If you don't like this article, you're welcome to click on the edit button & change stuff. Or to make a proposal to merge this article with Demographics of Ethiopia &/or Ethiopian people. (I'm willing to help you with that, BTW -- unless I've finally tossed in my keyboard & left this place.) I'm working hard on trying to combat the crap here, but comments like these just tick me off because I rarely hear about the good stuff I've managed to do here, yet I get plenty of complaints over not portraying people as plaster saints or presenting events & accomplishments with less than uncritical praise. -- llywrch (talk) 19:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Removal of the genetic analysis information ... asking why it is there

While patrolling I noticed someone had deleted the genetic analysis ... and I reverted the removal ... but then saw the remover had asked that it be justified why such information was there about Ethopia.

The reason (may) be that Ethiopia is often mentioned as the place where early humans first appeared (but I am no expert on this). I.E., as the place where humans first appeared, the genetic markers of the population may be justified for this country.

Perhaps the question is, is genetic analysis tainted in some way, or is this(now) a legitimate kind of information to include in an encyclopedia?

If the concern is that genetic analyis may be somehow connected to racist implications, then the text of of the material must be closely analyzed for any hint of that — but as genetic science advances ... well, I'll stop there.

The material was removed with a request that the material's existence be justified. These notes don't necessarily justify the information but removing information because some person doesn't see a legitimate reason for it being there is not legitimate either.

Bottom line, I will now replace the information in the article — subject to further discussion of course, Proofreader77 (talk) 02:03, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Genetic Section

As a person of Ethiopian descent, when I read this article I found it to be C-level. Not awful but not very informative. I do agree with some of the other African posters, that the genetics section is not from reliable sources. And the fact that the native African mtdna haplogroups of Ethiopian women are not mentioned, while alleged "Caucasian" or "European" groups are, very much shows that the writer of this article and the source of this genetic information is very biased and cannot be taken seriously. It is still shameful that a country with a wonderful black President like Barack Hussein Obama, allows backwater articles like this to be written and published on the internet as 100% true. As for this theory of Ethiopians being of European descent, I disagree. However I have learned that people will believe whatever they choose to believe. As I know and believe that Ethiopians are and were the first indigenous African people. Everyone else is descended from Adam and Eve, an Ethiopian couple---the first humans. Anyhow, in the words of Toni Morrison, "Definitions belong to the definers, and not the defined." Wikipedia may continue to publish and promote untrue articles about whatever they like. But this Ethiopian is not buying or believing any of it.

-signed Abrihet —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.54.81.188 (talk • contribs)

yeah, I doubt that Obama personally endorsed this article. It is just the usual ethnic crap that accretes on Wikipedia. It should be cleaned up. To begin with, as there is no ethnic group known as "Ethiopians" in the first place, I must ask how this article is different in scope from Demographics of Ethiopia. --dab (𒁳) 07:01, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreliable Information

This paragraph:

"Ethiopians are also among the most genetically diverse people in the world. A 2001 study based on cluster analysis that looked at a combined sample of Amhara and Oromo found that they share 62% of their genome with Caucasians (Ashkenazi Jews, Norwegians and Armenians), 24% with other Sub-Saharan Africans (Bantus), 8% with Austro-Melanesians (Papua New Guineans), and 6% with Far East Asians (Chinese).[5]"

...lists a source that is dated 2001. The Human Genome project was completed in 2003 making this source very dubious indeed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.169.64 (talk) 22:40, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Merge

Is there some reason this cannot or should not be merged with Demographics of Ethiopia? Also, the Infobox shows 70,000 Ethiopians in the U.S. What's the source for this? (See also Talk:Ethiopian American). -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:58, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. Both pages essentially cover the same material, but the demo article is better sourced so it should be merged to that. Middayexpress (talk) 01:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. I also think that Habesha people should also be merged into this article. I have started the process by suggesting it at the top of Demographics of Ethiopia. --- አቤል ዳዊት (talk) 19:06, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

The Habesha page should not be merged. The term refers primarily to a specific northern Ethiosemitic-speaking macro-ethnicity, not to all Ethiopians. Middayexpress (talk) 15:25, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Opposed The more I read these articles the more I am starting to lean towards keeping all three articles separate. I will like to invite all of you to join WikiProject Ethiopia for further discussions like this. It is totally redesigned and needs more active members like you.

I have removed all relevant merge tags. As it stands there three separate articles:

• People of Ethiopia - describing Ethiopian people as a whole nationality or ethnic group

• Ethiopian people and Ethiopians redirect to People of Ethiopia

• Demographics of Ethiopia - giving a statistical and demographical analysis of the current population of Ethiopia
• Habesha people - describing the "historical" Habesha people --- አቤል ዳዊት (Janweh) (talk) 20:12, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Habesha people, the page is on the macro-ethnicity as a whole, both past and present. Habesha people still very much exist in Ethiopia and Eritrea alike. Middayexpress (talk) 17:41, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

I only meant that the term Habesha in that article mainly refers to the historical or strictest definition of the term, as opposed to the commonly used (and sometimes controversial) reference to all People of Ethiopia. I believe that is why it is a separate article. Perhaps, a line of disambiguation should be added at the top to make that clear. I don't believe the last sentence of the lead in Habesha people is sufficient.— አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 03:25, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Opposed I think the article can be improved to include 86+ ethnic to give full images. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dotohelp (talk • contribs) 08:27, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

Biased BS

How come, a prehistoric/ancient semitic language like Geez, which is proved to be not related to any language on the Arabian Peninsula, is considered to come from said region?

How come, a writing system like the Abugida, which is proved to have originated from an ancient monumental southern semitic writing system and of which the oldest artifacts have been found in East Africa, a region where the oldest writing systems like the Egyptian/Nubian Hieroglyphs, Wadi El-Hol and Meroetic wr.sys. were developed, to be anyhow inspired by Indian wr.sys.?

I think it is time to admit the fact that the Semitic Urheimat is in East Africa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.48.173.157 (talk) 21:07, 2 October 2017 (UTC)