|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Darfur article.|
|WikiProject Africa / Sudan||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
- 1 Kids for Kids
- 2 Darfuri or Darfurian?
- 3 Population estimates?
- 4 external links
- 5 data removed 1
- 6 they are trying to silence us
- 7 "Black" and "African"
- 8 Population
- 9 7.4 million
- 10 Notes
- 11 External and Wiki Links
- 12 History Section - confusing sentence
- 13 new links
- 14 Link Error: dar
- 15 Link
- 16 oil in darfur?
- 17 Muammar Gaddafi
- 18 This article needs vandalism block
- 19 Help
- 20 Stop censoring the truth
- 21 Proposed Link
- 22 Darfur Conflict rewrite
- 23 Darfur Genocide
- 24 Huge underground lake found
- 25 Gaddafi
- 26 wikiproject
- 27 Languages
- 28 potentially controversial sentence
- 29 Black African?
- 30 Oil in Darfur
- 31 Erroneous Flag
- 32 "Dafuq"
- 33 Number of states
Kids for Kids
Someone from the kids of kids charity seems to have put in a promotional paragraph advertising their work, i don't think it really belongs here and is not cited. It is also a bit too obviously a pitch, thoughts on removing it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcuschenevix (talk • contribs) 09:28, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Darfuri or Darfurian?
Anybody got some? I hear about the numbers of people killed in the conflict and don't know how to relate it to the totals in the region. Even rough estimates would be good if hard numbers are not available.
Darfur population figures: 6 million, 6.5 million, or 6-7 million
Also if anyone is looking for a way to take action let me know. I have an email you can send to goverment officials. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ras FF (talk • contribs) 16:47, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
200,000 people have been killed scince the three years of the conflict's beginning
data removed 1
This was removed, why?
According to Ben Cohen, of truemajority.org (http://www.truemajority.org/darfur_webcast.cfm):
" Over the last several months, a government-backed Arabia militia in Sudan called the Janjaweed has been attacking black Africans. The Janjuweed tactics are crude but effective. They enter a village and use terror to force everyone to leave their homes and crops. Entire populations have fled to distant camps in the middle of desolate areas. These desert camps are now surrounded and controlled by the Janjuweed, and anyone who tries to leave is raped or killed. Unarmed international aid workers are turned away. A total of 370,000 human beings are already dead or in the late stages of dying from starvation in these extermination camps. The death toll could reach 1 million within the next few months.
Time is our worst enemy. Every day 1,000 people are dying in these camps. Currently, starvation is taking the weakest—70% of the dead are children five and under. As time goes on, the death toll will rise more quickly. The United States needs to ensure that food aid is brought to the people of Darfur with protection from an international military force. Congress has already allocated tens of millions of dollars for this mission and seems willing to allocate millions more if needed. The problem is that the Bush administration is unwilling to take the decisive action needed to make sure the food aid is safely delivered to those who need it most. Instead, they are calling on the corrupt Sudanese government to disarm their allies, the Janjuweed, and allow the food aid in. To pressure the Sudanese government, the Bush administration is talking about using sanctions, a process that will take months—long enough to kill everyone currently starving in the camps. That is why it is crucial that Congress speaks out now." Ben Cohen (truemajority.org and Ben and Jerry's ice cream)
- Ben Cohen is not a primary source. He's never even been to Darfur. Human Right Watch have, and are.
- It's inappropriately POV (please read Wikipedia:Tutorial (Keep in mind)), especially the bits about Bush, which are in any case irrelevant to an international audience.
- Its statistics - in particular the 370,000 claim - disagree with everything else I've been able to find; does he know better than the aid organizations who are actually in Darfur?
And finally, I do not appreciate being accused of "censoring any substance regarding Janjuweed attacks on Blacks in the Sudan" after having written most of Darfur conflict myself. - Mustafaa 05:22, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
they are trying to silence us
Fatima Aisha Mohammad (Darfur refuge, former schoolteacher, age 46),
from a Washington Post article:
"Very frankly, they selected us ladies and had what they wanted with us, like you would a wife," said Mohammad, 46, who has five children. "I am humiliated. Always they said, 'You are nothing. You are abid (a racial epithet). You are too black.' It was disgusting."
During a recent visit, government minders warned people at the school to stop talking about the rapes or face beatings or death. Minders also were seen handing out bribes to keep women from speaking to foreign visitors. But those at the school spoke anyway. A group of people handed a journalist two letters in Arabic that listed 40 names of rape victims, and wanted the list to be sent to Sen. Sam Brownback (news, bio, voting record) of Kansas and Rep. Frank R. Wolf of Virginia, Republicans who were touring the region and pressing the government to disarm the Janjaweed.
"I was sad. I am now very angry. Now they are trying to silence us. And they can't," Mohammad said. "What will people think of all of us out here? That we did this to ourselves? People will know the truth about what is happening in Darfur."
"Black" and "African"
I would like to raise two points:
1) What is meant by the word "African" applied to the non-Arabic speaking tribes? Does it refer to the color of their skin, to their language, or what? The word originally meant people of north Africa, who were not black.
2) I have heard that the so-called "Arabs" of Darfur are actually "black" as well. So shouldn't the word "black" be deleted from the part about the conflict?
From what I have read, the people on the two sides are more or less the same color and have the same religion.
EricK 11:28, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)
A lot of it has to do with the terms people use to refer to each other. Many of the nomadic tribes call the Fur "blacks" (we won't go into the more derogatory terms) and themselves "Arabs." Although a few of the "Arabs" are slightly lighter-skinned, there is probably very little true Arab lineage involved (I think it's more a cultural thing). On the other hand, not all Arabs are janjaweed and some janjaweed are not Arab. I find it easier to just talk about men on camels and horses with big guns. Bold text
Good jumping off point for more info on Darfur. I thouht that the media's good/bad guy sloganeering was probably bull. I liked one comment " why are us Jews getting involved in this - black Muslim against black Muslim"( a paraphrase) - is wiki Jewish?( I don't have one of those huge dictionaries
- I think the difference between 'Black' and 'African' Is that Black means any negro in all of the world (Especially USA and UK) and African refers to anyone living in Africa-- regardless of race. Sub- Saharan Africa gives its meaning away, and South Afican means living in South Africa because any other meaning would be confusing. --RayquazaDialgaWeird2210 (talk) 23:18, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
The article states that Darfur has a population of 74 million people. This seems to be either a typographical error, an inflated estimate, or an intentional supplication of misinformation. Whatever the case, 74 million is nearly TWICE the estimated population of Sudan as a whole. I will edit this as soon as I can find a reliable population estimate for the region.
After some research, it appears 74 million was a typographical error, and the previous author meant to type 7.4 million. This error has been corrected.
Why isn't there a complete reference for Prunier? Should be Prunier: Darfur. The Ambiguous Genocide.
External and Wiki Links
I seperated the external and wiki links. I also added an external link to the Save Durfur campaign. I also deleted the racist comment here on the talk page that's apparently been on here since April, and nothing was done about it. JanderVK 10:24, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I have removed the wiki links to Aegis, as there is no reason why this specific awarness raising group should be mentioned in here. And afterall they have no influence whatsoever on Darfur or the ongoing events there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 17:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
History Section - confusing sentence
The following is a sentence fragment and therefore causes confusion: The influence of an ideology of Arab supremacy propagated by Libyan president Muammar al-Gaddafi that began to be acted upon by Darfuris, including those identified as "Arab" and "African"
The best website is www.sauverledarfour.org
- It may be, but its in french
- --Chrisdab 14:37, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
You can find a lot of articles in English from USA and United Kingdom
Link Error: dar
"a businessman who was competing with the dar over access to slaves and ivory in Bahr el Ghazal to the south of Darfur." The Word 'dar' is linked to an article, which is only a reference page that gives no clue what is meant.
Hi maybe you can put links from NGO like www.savedarfur.org and www.sauverledarfour.org
oil in darfur?
Based on reading a debate on whether darfur contains oil, ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/6058920.stm ), I think it would be good if someone who knows something about the possibility to add it to the article somewhere, seeing as it has significant influenece on the political discussion surrounding the darfur conflict.
- He called for Pan-Arabism, and Arab unity, not Arab supremacy. He was a socialist, revolutionary, those ideas of so called "Arab Supremacy" conflict with his notions of socialism etc. See Muammar Gaddafi article for details.
-Excuse me? It most certainly is not unsourced, since when did the US Department of State's Background Notes, (Nov 2005) on Libyan history not qualify as an accurate source? And that is only one of several sources listed there.
In addition as i said in the Darfur conflict article id like to read the WHOLE paragraph or page that this source of yours claims. Please post it here to verify it, or provide a link. But from what I know, Gaddafi is seen across Africa as a man of revolution, socialist change etc. Gmflash
- Look better; none of the inline citations present in the article covers the specific section (Gaddafi#Islamic Socialism and Pan-Arabism), the other are "external links", not "references", and as WP:EL tells, external links is the material that isn't used for referencing. Anyways, BT has already awnsered you at Talk:Darfur conflict.--Aldux 00:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
This article needs vandalism block
Time to limit the editing of this page due to vandalism. Someone needs to do this now. PLEASE ADD TO THIS ARTICLE: limit editing due to vandalism --Scottymoze 03:46, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I second that idea.
[Still appears to be happening. I will try and remove the 'cock' references (subtle swearing or genuine bad English, it still doesn't look right)]
GrantB 00:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Hey, kind of new to this, but this page has been altered with a lot of swear words, you might want to do something about it. I would if I didn't have a million deadlines for Saturday.
Stop censoring the truth
Why is it that everytime i clarify it is African-arab janjaweed, and Muslim Rebels people have a problem with it and remove the info. This is the truth, nothing false at all and anyone with a history of the conflict or knowledge of the current conflict will tell you the same. Removing this info (so blatantly by people with an agenda - ie. Aldux) results to vandalism of the article, I am telling you now everytime you make this change it will simply be reverted to the truth. Save yourself the time and don't bother. The funny thing is that all those ppl with an agenda, who are trying to make a fool of arabs and muslim people, who are trying to vilify them etc. cant see that the only ones whom they are really making a fool of is themselves. Gmflash 02:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Bravo! Far from me to dare dissent from a man who knows The Truth™. It's really a pity wikipedia cares only about reliability, and not about The Truth™. Oh, and, BTW, personal attacks and assumption of bad faith is not tolerated in wikipedia.--Aldux 13:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, thankyou for letting me know genius. Yes wikipedia cares about reliability, and the fact that they are Muslim rebels is more than reliable, it is fact. The SLM is a Islamic movement, they swore oaths on the Quran. The JEM also is Islamic. In fact, everyone living in Darfur are Muslim, so what is the problem here? I think the problem is that you can't get around this fact, and it doesn't fit in with your slandering plans of Arabs and Muslims. Maybe try something different ey (or get a job, find a hobby - other than slandering arabs and muslims)
- I've edited this out of compromise, and truly out of neutrality, to let people know I don't have any agenda but the truth(ie. a pro-arab or pro-muslim agenda either) I took out all references to "arab" or "muslim", now it is merely a conflict between Janjaweed and rebels, this is the truth. However if people insist on labelling this as a racial ie. arab vs african conflict then i have no choice but to edit the article, and no this is my point -Darfur isnt in China, but how will an uninformed reader, when speaking of "arabs" know that they are indeed African-arabs, ie. black arabs and not think it is a racial conflict. In addition the rebel groups are Muslim, in fact they are all really black and muslim in Darfur. The conflict comes in at a tribal level, and a sedentary/nomadic level, as well as a political level - the government wants to assert its force in the region, and the rebels of the region want independence. why are people trying to make this conflict something it is not?
Gmflash 02:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I'm working with The Pulitzer Center, a non-profit journalism agency geared towards providing audience to underrepresented news stories. I'd like to link this page to a few related articles on the Pulitzer site; http://www.pulitzercenter.org/showproject.cfm?id=18 concerning the conflict in Darfur, Please let me know if I can post these links. Many thanks in advance. Blendus 04:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Darfur Conflict rewrite
I did a major cleanup/rewrite of the Darfur Conflict section - there was a lot of outdated, unreferenced and biased material. I added some references, and tried to give it a more neutral voice, though it's still by no means perfect. Puddleglum 20:47, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed this section. Vietnam is not a war, Rwanda is not a genocide and Darfur is not a conflict. It is already briefly described and linked, so do not give undue weight. That's the whole point of breakout articles. The external links specific to the recent conflict should also be moved to Bibliography of the Darfur conflict. - BanyanTree 11:40, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
why is there no mention of the genocide in Darfur in this article? Capt Jack Doicy 22:54, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Coments by: Ranjit Kumar (email@example.com) I don't understand why the UN with the help of few of the strongest nations combine their peace forces, fight the government of Sudan, and save hundreds of thousands of peoples' lives, what is so difficult about this? Surely Sudan's government or their Arab militia is no world power, it would be easy to do that. Why are the world powers interested in only watching and collecting news? Beides this, if the Arab countries have any shame in the vandals using tehir name to loot and rape people in Darfur, then they (the arab countries) should fight those vandals, or let teh world at large regard this as an act of the arab countries.
WHAT IS GOING ON IS VERY WRONG the goverment should get off there hinends and do somthing and about it insted there just letting it happen it's wrong!!!
18.104.22.168 a mad american 22.214.171.124 (geni)
Darfur conflict should be renamed to Darfur genocide.
NO one wants to call what is happening till this day in Palestine for more than 59 years by theses Zionist fake Jews(not even Semites let alone related to Jacob) "Genocide".
We want to know why?
If there is a Problem in Darfour, it is between the "unelected dictatorship" government of Sudan and western sponsored Rebels to continue the war.
Sudanese as people Have No part in it.
Where as the Genocide Cause by Israel to Palestinians ( Expulsion , transfer, occupation) is Caused by ELECTED Zionist Jewish occupational Government of Israel.
Jews Have great direct responsibility in it since Jews Elect their war criminals to Power to do war crimes in their names
And What about Iraq?
Is it not Genocide?
126.96.36.199 14:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- I added the standard link to main article template at the top of the section. A lot of the info in that section could be moved to the other article. This article should be an encylopaedic entry about Darfur. The conflict would seem to belong in the other article. Please pay attention to the structure as that will determine how successfully the page avoids unnecessary political controversy and bickering. If you want to help Darfur then concentrate on editing in clear and verfiable facts. That will help everyone. Thankyou DJ Barney (talk) 00:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Huge underground lake found
This should be integrated into the geography section. If it affects the Darfur conflict as predicted by the article, it should be added there. I think that's a bit premature though. I won't have the time until half a day from now to add it here, so please, feel free to beat me to the punch. Water find 'may end Darfur war' 7/18/07. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 11:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
9th August 2007 I founded the organisation KIDS FOR KIDS in 2001, before the conflict, to help children living in Darfur because what I saw was intolerable and inexcusable - and conditions are worse now. Our website www.kidsforkids.org.uk has a great deal of information on Darfur and life in the villages and I wondered if a link could be put on the page please? I visit twice a year and am in constant touch so there is a steady stream of news. Patricia Parker - Chairman & Founder
Removed this sentence until someone can provide evidence-- "The influence of an ideology of Arab supremacy propagated by Libyan leader Muammar al-Gaddafi that began to be acted upon by Darfurians, including those identified as "Arab" and "African"." Seems counterintuitive given Gaddafi's pan-Africanist ideology. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 16:49, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
who would support the creation of a "wikiproject darfur" , to cover articles related to darfur --Leitz 17:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've spoken with an immigrant from Darfur which told me that Darfur actually has an Arabic variant which also contains several letters that Arabic does not have (such as a letter for 'v'), this language is also called Fur, is there anyway to reference this? 184.108.40.206 (talk) 23:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
potentially controversial sentence
This fragment in the Conflict section needs '''''a lot''''' of work first, this Omar al-Bashir, an Arabic speaking black African, with affiliation to the north, has backed a mercenary group, the Janjaweed, to flush out, by many controversial means, the rebels who operate from the midst of southern farmers . What the heck is black African? That isn't a language to my knowledge. It could be racist and that really would not be good. I will put an internal link on that.--RayquazaDialgaWeird2210 (talk) 23:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
A quibble on specific usage --
From section "Conflict":
"The president of the country, Omar al-Bashir, [is] an Arabic speaking black African .... This conflict has often been erroneously characterized as one between races (Arabs versus blacks), when in fact both sides of the conflict are represented by blacks, with the people of the north being mainly nomads and Arabic speaking, and the people of the south being farmers and non-Arabic speaking."
Black African redirects to Black people, which attempts to give a worldwide rather than Africa-centric view of the subject. Is this okay for our purposes here, or is it important for our context to focus on "Black people in Africa" (as opposed to "Arabic people in Africa")? -- Writtenonsand (talk) 13:15, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Oil in Darfur
- That's for the very good reason that there are no significant oil finds in Darfur. The oil's down south. See Economy of Sudan#Petroleum. - BanyanTree 06:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Could someone find some background on the flag that's posted to the article? If no central government of Darfur exists, how can this flag be representative of it? Who designed it and what does it represent? --220.127.116.11 (talk) 22:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
- Based on the description at File:Bandera Darfur.svg, I have identified the flag as that of the rebel Darfur Liberation Front. Speaking with no background knowledge, I would assume the colors are chosen for the same reason as the Pan-African flag, with the inclusion of the crescent of the star and crescent to indicate Islam. I make no judgment about its relevance to this article. - BanyanTree 03:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
The link in the box on the right under "Capital" is listed "Dafuq" and links the the wiki article on "Fuck". This has clearly been vandalized and should be corrected.
It appears as though Darfur does not have a capital itself, but that each one of its five states has its own capital. I removed the "Capital" section of the info box.
Number of states
There are two different numbers given for the number of states in the region. The introduction says "3," but the government section starts as saying "5" but then says that it came into effect early 2012. However all the maps on the page still refer to 3.