Talk:Hutterites/Archive 1

Hutterites emphasize family life.[edit]

Married couples remain married for their entire lives. If there is a single person in the colony, one of the married families will take him or her in as a member of their family.

Edit: They are not nessesarily taken in as a member of the family, but are given a home of their own after a certain age. It can be any age. Whenever the person decides that it's time, or when their parents die, they take over the family house.

Doukhobors[edit]

I'm not sure why the Doukhobors are included in the links. They are not anabaptists, or even baptists. They no longer live communally, although they once did, as did many ethnic groups after arriving to settle in North America.Landroo 05:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I remember seeing this link and was going to post a question about it, but then just forgot. CWood 01:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current Challenges Section?[edit]

Are there any sources for the Current Challenges section? It makes a number of statements that aren't sourced.

Michael Hari[edit]

Has anyone heard about Michael Hari and his children?The story was featured on the Dr Phil show a while ago.He abducted his two children and went to live in a Hutterite community somewhere in the US.Since I am not from America,I was wondering if they had found the kids.I was thinking about starting an article about controversy in the church and it would be helpful to have that information.Serenacw 02:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Might check out the following, though I think it's well outside of the Wiki article.

http://www.amw.com/fugitives/case.cfm?id=33165

http://www.elmendorfbelievers.com/dr_phil.php

Quick note: Elmendorf is not considered a Hutterite community (according to the Hutterites). They are a splinter church which broke away from the Hutterite church and are more affiliated with Charity Church Ministries.

In response to the Doctor Phil show--controversy sells, not the truth.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Iankl (talk • contribs) 02:29, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Please sign your posts on talk pages with ~~~~.) Can you say more about Charity Church Ministries? Are there other former Hutterite groups involved, or what would attract a splinter group to them? Just curious. JonHarder 13:30, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The official site for Charity is http://www.charityministries.org. Heart Beat of the Remnant is one of their publications: http://www.charityministries.org/theremnant/index.cfm. It was started by a former Amish man and a Baptist preacher. Their theology is unique in blending Mennonite doctrines with fundamentalist Christianity. They also are particularly stringent in applying religious regulation.

The only direct similarity they would have with the Hutterites would be that Mennonites and Hutterites are both of the Anabaptist tradition. I believe that Charity has made at least one trip to evangalize the Hutterites [1].

I am not the same anon poster as above, so can't address his/her comment on Dr. Phil.

WP:NOT a free webhost[edit]

This is an encyclopedia, not a website for Hutterites. Please rewrite this in an encyclopedic manner. Thank you. --Fang Aili ^talk 18:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly are you talking about? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.191.19.42 (talk) 22:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The addition of pages of unencyclopedic and copyrighted material, which have been reverted. See the Dec 1 edit activity. --Fang Aili ^talk 22:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article needs some serious work, it's way too casual in tone and also feels like it steps over the line as far as NPOV goes. Andrewhime 19:36, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Math problems[edit]

In the section near the bottom of the page which details the number and location of various Hutterite colonies, the numbers don't add up. It says there are 472 colonies, but it adds up to 473. If anyone has access to the original source, these numbers should be verified to see whether the total is incorrect, the subtotals are incorrect, or if the source itself is incorrect. --Rob 05:08, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does it really matter if it is +/-1. I could see if it were 20% but let's not be anal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.230.176.119 (talk) 01:21, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really concerned about one colony either way (though I'm not sure how that missing colony would feel!), but it points to a possible misquote, which may mean that there are other errors in the numbers. --Rob (talk) 19:08, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Uuuh! The numbers must add up! It matters if it is +/-1, not very much, but a little. Keep on fixing numbers! ... said: Rursus (bork²) 13:48, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two Hutterite martyrs tortured?[edit]

Article makes a rather grandiose claim about 2 members being tortured and killed at Ft Leavenworth for refusing military service during WW1. Such a grand claim should be supported by more than a mis-referenced link leading to a blog. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richl025 (talk • contribs) 05:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know of a source at the local library, I will post shortly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.230.176.119 (talk) 01:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This has been updated to a non-blog reference. This really is not a grand claim. During WWI, Leavenworth was known for its brutality against conscientious objectors and many went through horrific torture at the hands of the guards. Others died, but none are so well documented as the two Hutterite cases. ✤ JonHarder ^talk 13:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only reference given in the article is a book published by a Mennonite publishing company that is certainly not an objective history. If such events were really all that common, and "well documented", there should be a more objective source that could be quoted.Alexgriz (talk) 02:53, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unsure how a Mennonite publishing company is equated with non-objectivity re: history. Many reputable publishers of Mennonite background or focus exist today and publish the works of noted History PhDs and scholars, many of whom are published in peer-reviewed journals. Regarding the issue of the 'Martyrs of Alcatraz', i.e. those who died after imprisonment at Ft. Leavenworth: it is a well-documented fact with primary evidence (family documents, diaries), eyewitness accounts, and academic accounts. Most of these, yes, are published by smaller publishing houses that deal in historical material in this niche and are, therefore, mostly of Anabaptist origin. Other sources, however, have recognized the event, such as the 1964 book 'Two paths to utopia : the Hutterites and the Llano colony', by Paul K. Conkin, published by the University of Nebraska Press. 74.13.184.189 (talk) 20:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to indicate that anything put out there by a Mennonite publishing house was not objective history, but I looked at that book, and it certainly was not an objective history. I have not laid hands on a copy Two Paths to Utopia, so I can't comment on that one. But the earlier post talked about how well documented the two Hutterite cases were, and then you have the claims that the Anabaptist publishing houses publish works of notable scholars that also publish in peer-reviewed journals. Great. Cite them - that's all I'm asking. The citation that was given is not an objective history, and if it's the best there is then at the very least, there should be wording in the article that indicates that the sources are sketchy. Just for the record, I believe the allegation, and was look at some other stuff in the history of Ft. Leavenworth when I stumbled across this. It's just that sometimes these things that everyone knows are true turn out to be problematic. Alexgriz (talk) 18:01, 6 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Third Opinion. A recent independent source would be ideal. If it is poorly covered by reliable, independent sources or only voiced by a tiny minority, it should not be included. --Vassyana (talk) 17:04, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

picture[edit]

I took out this picture. I can't find a relationship within the text. --Hao Xi (talk) 13:02, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bruderhof/Arnoldlieut[edit]

It is true that whastever the Bruderhof are calling themselves now, they do not belong to he hutterites Anymore However, they did at one time. Given that this is an encyclopedia article on Hutterites and not a web site for the Hutterites I think a reference to the ArnoldLieut/Bruderhof which makes clear that they were but are no longer a part of the Hutterites belongs under the "Types" section and not as an orphaned sentence in the body of the text.

Whatever their status now, they were a type of Hutterite from 1974-1990 and apparently at a few other times as well. Encylopedia articles deal with historic as well as current events. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.100.228.17 (talk) 13:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Who is and is not a Hutterite[edit]

I think limiting the use of the term Hutterite to the three main branches is kind of arbitrary. Declaring that the Bruderhof, the Decker colony in Guerrero, or Elmendorf are non-Hutterites on the grounds that they are not in fellowship with the Lehrerleut, Schiedeleut, or Dariusleut is fine if you are a member of one of those groups, but it is hardly reasonable to insist that those three fellowships are the sole arbiters of who is and is not a Hutterite for the entire world. After all, Jacob Hutter never heard of any of those three groups. It causes a POV problem for the article to claim that people who call themselves Hutterian Brethren, speak Huttrisch (or at least German), live in colonies, and read Peter Riedeman are not Hutterites because some other people who claim to be Hutterites say they are not.166.137.89.143 (talk) 02:24, 12 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Photos of Hutterites[edit]

Since we know Hutterites object to having their photos taken (going so far as to pursue legal action to remove the photo requirement from official documents), is it appropriate to have photos of Hutterites in the article? MaxVeers (talk) 17:09, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised, because I've added a link to a classic 1964 NFB documentary, where they seemed to have no objection whatsoever to welcoming a film crew into their midst. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:04, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia follows the wikipedia rules: the photos shall adher to Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License 3.0 and the GFDL. Whether Hutterites accept whether to be photographed or not, is a matter between the photographer and the Hutterites in question - I don't know about U.S. law, but in Sweden (and I suspect the cituation is very similar in U.S.) all photos shall need the photographed persons consent, or else be destroyed. ... said: Rursus (bork²) 13:53, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While certain groups of Hutterites do object to their photo being taken, many have no objection whatsoever; I would assume, then, that the Hutterites pictured are of that group. 74.13.184.189 (talk) 20:10, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- I've never seen such an objection, even after travelling and mingling through a couple of dozen colonies (Dariusleut, Schmiedeleut and Lehrerleut) throughout South Dakota and Montana. I've still got a ton of photos from those visits, many posing/smiling directly into the camera. Nobody ever hinted at any objection to being photographed. I suspect the objection is not to the photo, but to the legal document. (See also the National Geographic cover article, "The Hutterites, Plain People of the West", July 1970 - same unabashed photography) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.250.248.70 (talk) 04:05, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I grew up as a hutterite and was a photographer on the colony. There were frequent objections but it was nonetheless tolerated. With the proliferation of cellphones, it’s almost impossible to ban photography nowadays. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:56A:71E2:AE00:E8F4:E0AE:1B79:87E9 (talk) 06:41, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where were the Categories?[edit]

Strange that this article could have existed so long without Categories. I've added a few, based on what I saw on the Amish and Mennonite main articles. There are no doubt more that should be added. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:02, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Driver's Licence photos[edit]

The Hutterites have lost this one, as the Supreme Court of Canada has upheld provincial rules that make a digital photo mandatory for all new driver's licences (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/07/24/hutterite-supreme-court024.html). 74.12.202.177 (talk) 14:44, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Growth Horomones and "inhumane" treatment of animals[edit]

I added a citation marker on this line. It sounds as if someone with an agenda decided to make an unfounded assertion or at least failed to adequately cite these things. I would also question the relevance of adding such a line - it is a largely socio-politically charged tone and not quite up to par with the quality of an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.71.68.69 (talk) 04:32, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think comments suggesting the Arnoldleut/Bruderhof or Elmendorf Hutterian Brethren aren't REAL Hutterites are either fair or measure up to encyclopedia standards. They call themselves Hutterites, which is all the other Hutterites can say of themselves —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.42.21.188 (talk) 06:44, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unaware of the Elmendorf group, but I can say that the history of the Hutterian Brethren in North America has not been without divisions. The Arnoldleut, however, were not born-Hutterites (i.e. ethnic Hutterites) and though they embraced Hutterian values for a time and were likewise welcomed into the Hutterian community, they no longer do so and have been institutionally separate from the Hutterian Brethren for 20 years. The Arnoldleut are not a 'splinter group', per se, but a temporarily-grafted group (to continue the analogy!) that is no longer grafted. Other divisions within the Hutterian Brethren have occurred, but these colonies or groups of colonies have remained a part of the church AND, most notably, are ethnically Hutterian in nature. No, the Bruderhof are not 'real' Hutterites, but I agree there is a better way to say that. 74.13.184.189 (talk) 20:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hutterites in Canada and the United States[edit]

This article is woefully lacking in information about the Hutterite colonies in North America, which outnumber their German brothers by 10 to 1. I myself am not an expert on these people, though I would like to be, but someone needs to fill this article out. Sadena (talk) 14:04, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Self Sufficient Assertion[edit]

The assertion that "The colony is virtually or literally self-sufficient, constructing its own buildings, doing its own maintenance and repair on equipment, making its own clothes, etc." seems inconsistent with the first picture (showing people shucking corn)in the article.

The picture shows a lot of items which almost certainly not made by the members of the colony out of materials they grew/gathered. These items include plastic buckets, plastic & metal chairs, cooking strainers (on the wall), cardboard boxes with very commercial looking lettering (on top the shelves), hoses/tubing (above man bending over by stairs), a tripod (by the stairs - but perhaps that's owned by the outside photographer), jackpost (at upper right corner supporting beam). Most of these items look suspiciously like items made by 'conventional' mass manufacturing which seems inconsistent with most of the article.

Someone having insight on this might be able to update the article to resolve this seeming inconsistency. WorthWhatPaid (talk) 22:34, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I clarified that point as probably intended by the original editor. The colonies do pretty much all their own labor. They obviously are not "self-sufficient" when it comes to making their own tractors or kitchen sinks. Mikeatnip (talk) 22:21, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TV Show?[edit]

No mention of the show on the National Geographic Channel "Meet the Hutterites"???? I'd write about it if I had more time. Bigmac31 (talk) 20:58, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added this, but I need to find the reference for the last statement. The letter is available online, but I cant find it at the moment. Mikeatnip (talk) 22:15, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dariusleut, Japan?[edit]

According to this article, there's a Hutterite community called "Dariusleut" in Japan. I'm surprised I hadn't heard of it. I think a reference needs to be added there, and a more specific location. What prefecture is it in? Boneyard90 (talk) 22:05, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.foodprocessing-technology.com/projects/dakotaprovisions/
Triggered by \bfoodprocessing-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 12:50, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:42, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Hutterite. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:10, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hutterite. 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/20091221071000/http://csc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2009/2009scc37/2009scc37.html to http://csc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2009/2009scc37/2009scc37.html

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 23:22, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 May 2018[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:03, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hutterite → Hutterites – Per WP:PLURAL, articles on people groups should use the plural form in the article title. Rreagan007 (talk) 06:23, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support move, but a redirect is fine as it's both cheap and common. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:30, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:10, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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