Talk:South African farm attacks
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Previous discussions
Rewrite — POV — Weasel words — But who are the Weasels? — Murder rate among white SA commercial farmers — control calculation — Sections — Controversial
Agricultural output / Missing mealies • Daily bloodshed - death squads • Racist Boers Nostalgic for Apartheid? • POV/research/Black negationism • Struggle songs and hate speech • Genocide • Title. • (Moved to talk page) • Biased • Proposed page move to South African farm attacks • Redirect pages up for deletion • Title? Please. •
[edit] Genocide Watch source
I've edited the sentence in the intro about the Genocide Watch article making claims about the murder rate per attack, as I cannot find any such claim in the article referenced, or anywhere else on the site. I've left the claim that it constitutes genocide. I've also emailed the organisation, asking them for more information about the article, as it makes no mention of the author, and uses only newspaper articles and one private website as its sources. (It also has the title "Dear Dr", suggesting that it was written by someone outside of their organisation, and sent as correspondence.) -Kieran 13:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
The following is a transcript of what Gregory Stanton: the President of Genocide Watch said in the Carte Blanche television program (a South African news magazine program) regarding the murder rate of the farmers which he calls a genocide under the Genocide Convention.
Link to the program transcript.
There should be more from the organization soon concerning this issue as I understand that they will be doing a follow up on the situation.
I have added the statistic of the boer murder rate in comparison with the rest of the population; it was in the Genocide Watch article referenced, and I added the reference to the Carte Blanche program transcript as it is in there as well.
[edit] Edit of 18:00, 26 October 2006
As part of the edit I did, I commented out (but did not delete) the "Criticism" section due to the following concerns:
- The first sentence is just a broad statement without being backed up by a reliable source
- The second sentence (which IS referenced) is referring to the use of the well-known political slogan "Kill the Boer, kill the farmer" in a post-apartheid setting where it has been defined as hate speech. This is fine, but here is my problem: the connection between officials "not stopping crowds chanting this slogan" and the government "failing to take appropriate measures against these attacks" has no basis in fact. The editor who originally put this in created a logical leap in his own mind between the two incidents, which constitutes original research and is not permitted. The reason I commented it out instead of deleting is so that IF a reliable reference is found that makes this logical connection then it can be re-stated, citing the appropriate reference.
- The second paragraph of that section is also unreferenced and in fact does not seem to belong in that section.
I also removed the long-standing unreferenced "reasoning behind the attacks" speculation. There has been more than ample time given to find a reference to those claims. They can be added back in with a reliable reference. I also re-arranged the rest of the article to improve style and flow, putting the TAU's response to the Committee of Inquiry report in the correct chronological place, and moving GW's claims to the lead-in section as it seems more logical there. Zunaid (T•C) Please rate me at Editor Review! 16:14, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Reference added. Farmer armies in the killing fields --Jvb – October 27, 2006
- That reference you provide is an article about farmers conducting patrols etc. It does not address any of the points I raised above. I'm off home now, but next week I'll write in a section about the farm patrols using the ref you provided. Zunaid (T•C) Please rate me at Editor Review! 14:57, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- I disagree. The suspended “Criticism of government” section of the article does address the points you raise. Indeed, saying that the police "are not part of the solution but part of the bloody problem" is, if not worse, saying the same as that “Critics of the government say that the South African government is failing to take appropriate measures against these attacks”. Therefore I unsuspended the incriminated section. --Jvb – November 7, 2006
- That reference you provide is an article about farmers conducting patrols etc. It does not address any of the points I raised above. I'm off home now, but next week I'll write in a section about the farm patrols using the ref you provided. Zunaid (T•C) Please rate me at Editor Review! 14:57, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
I've rewritten the section to reflect exactly the quote that was made, with the correct attribution. I've also included a mention about the farm patrols in that same section. However, points 2 and 3 have still not ben addressed with the addition of this particular reference so I've commented them back out. Zunaid©Please rate me at Editor Review! 14:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Neutrality tag
I feel the article as it stands is fairly neutral and generally balances out the viewpoints presented, thus the neutrality tag should be removed. Comments? Zunaid©Please rate me at Editor Review! 11:28, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
It seems okay to me too. Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 16:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- NOT NEUTRAL - This article is not neutral, and the tag should not be removed.--222.154.88.252 00:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Care to explain your reasoning? Zunaid©Please rate me at Editor Review! 14:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Crime Expo South Africa
A link should be added to the Crime Expo South Africa article, as it exposes the South African farm attacks / Farm murders. The editors (Zyxoas / Zunaid) above would be object to it, whilst stating that this article is neutral. --222.154.88.252 00:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
These editors are being paid to edit this article, and a photograph of them will be published shortly.--222.154.88.252 00:52, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- 222.154.88.252 is a disgruntled ex-pat now in New Zealand, methinks, trying to justify their exit. Wizzy…☎ 07:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- There's nothing wrong witht that. He or they had sufficient reason for leaving. --Adriaan90 08:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
A photograph of me!? I'd love to see this one, please!! Btw my name is Tebello Thejane, I'm 22 years old, and I live in Meyerton -- I can give you even more info should you need it. This should be interesting... o_O Zyxoas (talk to me - I'll listen) 09:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- This is rather amusing; must say. Thank the FSM for emigration, that way we can get rid of some of our racists, moaners and wallies... Mikker (...) 18:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Yes, get rid of them like Zimbabwe did, so South Africa can join its northern neighbours in progress, prosperity and success! I think this contributor should be awarded the Robert Mugabe Prize, or should that be the Idi Amin Prize? Booshank (talk) 23:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Wow what a disgusting thing to say. Do you think whites are the only people to be affected by crime and want to emigrate?? Go and take a look at News24.co.za and remove your blinkers. I fully agree that the link to Crime Expo should be added - most of the incidents there are not reported by newspapers as they are 'so common'. SparrowsWing 23:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Ummm... no I don't think "whites are the only people to be affected by crime and want to emigrate". Where the hell did you get that from? And I've had more than my fair share of break-ins and other criminal events, so I'm not saying crime isn't a problem. I'm saying SA has an unusually large number of stupid idiots, people who do nothing but moan and racists. Thankfully, some of these emigrate. Good riddance. Mikker (...) 23:49, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Then I do apologise - I totally misread what you said. Crime is something that affects all people in South Africa ... and you are quite correct - moaning will not change or improve things. SparrowsWing 23:56, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I do not agree with the link to Crime Expo. It did not give an accurate indication of farm attacks - it was a sensationalist, attention seeking site, trying to hamper job creation. The 'editor' also didn't add comments from people who were against the site, or had good stories... bluntly ignored it, so it didn't give you an indication of that - only the bad things. While Crime in SA is a problem, that was not a constructive way to try and counter it. (White female living in SA) --Theabc 20:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Organize Campaign?!
Human Rights Watch, however, states that the term "farm attacks" (plaasmoorde in Afrikaans, farm murders) is misleading, as it suggests the presence of an organised campaign, rather than simply increased crime rates, and has criticised the South African government for giving the issue too much attention at the expense of the rights of other South Africans, such as farm labourers.[6]
I would not say that ALL the attacks are part of an organized campaign. But speeches of ANC leaders calling for "kill the Boer, Kill the farmer" are a strange coincidence towards this atrocities. And then there are the pledges of prominent ANC people to kill the Boers:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NKiePbTcAfY This one includes even Nelson Mandela Don't forget to few the pictures: http://www.africancrisis.org/Photos45.asp So the question remains, how to handle this in the article.41.208.196.148 18:11, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- the question of "Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer" is addressed above. Provide an independent third-party reference (e.g. a news article) that makes the connection between the slogan and the attacks, and then it can be included in the article. Zunaid©® 14:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
-
- Here's a reference from an important SA news source: http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,9909,2-7-1442_2314200,00.html Booshank (talk) 13:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
The number of 'black farmers' killed is misleading ! I could not confirm that anywhere :(. We should have that checked and if no one can give a nr. or at least a credible reference, it should be removed, me thinks. Otherwise this article will not be credible - it will be more like a 'personal opiniopn forum'.
[edit] Anti-farmer hate speech info added
I added a section about the belief that farm attacks had a political motive and were linked to politicians' verbal attacks on farmers.
I realise this is a controversial topic but to cover it properly I believe we need to include the significant viewpoints, even if conflicting. The belief that farm attacks have at least in a part a political motive and that hate speech inflames some people to carry out attacks is certainly a significant opinion and must be included. As I understand it, this information was removed as uncited previously. Therefore I have provided a reference to the respected mainstream South African news site News24.com. Of course it isn't Wikipedia's job to decide which opinion is correct, merely to provide the verifiable significant views. I feel this had not been done properly by excluding the belief that attacks were politically motivated or linked to slogans such as "Kill the Boer, kill the farmer!", perhaps in an effort to avoid being controversial. Booshank (talk) 00:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

