Talk:History of slavery

message: The article incorrectly asserts (in the first sentence) that most cultures had slaves. This is totally untrue.   Taino did not have slaves. Olmecs did not have slaves.   Yoruba did not have slaves, nor did more of the early ancient cultures in the land we call North America, and South America.   Further, the first paragraphs is too politely written. It should give the terms: "Genocide" "crime", inhumane", etc. It approaches slavery in very nonchalant manner, almost validating it. --2604:2000:DDD1:4900:39DC:A8CF:93F5:7C8E (talk) 09:00, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Article wrong. Most cultures did not have slaves. But modern imperial / colonial ones did

message: The slave trade was very sad. I hope the people involved were punished for their mistakes.
--I agree with you re punishment.  Of course they could be punished. Even if a government were involved, we could punish the government officials, like we did to Hitler, etc. Some of the responses here seek to detract from your position with illogical responses.   --2604:2000:DDD1:4900:39DC:A8CF:93F5:7C8E (talk) 09:01, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Dumping material should be punishable by some heavy wiki-beating-on-the-head of parties responsible. Consider DYKing this article, it should achieve much more attention if this succeeds.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  11:48, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dumping

message: delted weasle words and direct POV which is trying to white wash the transatlantic slave trade by demonizing Arabs and redirecting focus. Just state the facts, we dont need any POV comparisions, site multi sources. I will tag this section because it is not neutral. The fact that it is called Arab slave trade over and over again is a bias. when even indians and chinese were involved. there is also virtually no ref for the BIG statements.--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ 22:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But Arabs traded African slaves on a massive scale.  In fact, other than some isolated Roman and Greek occurrences, they invented the whole idea of exporting slaves from Africa.  Sorry, but thems the facts.  Don't try to wash your hands of it just because you are not a WASP.  That is the height of the PC crap that is ruining everything.Arlesd (talk) 02:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

text: "The Muslim Slave Trade was horrible, but not that horrible" -- I want to leave this up here because, sadly, this is what many editors believe. DenverCoder9 (talk) DenverCoder9 (talk) 04:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Slavery in Arabia, the Ottoman Empire and the Middle East

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on History of slavery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071015120759/http://worldheritage.heindorffhus.dk:80/frame-TanzaniaZanzibar.htm to http://www.worldheritage.heindorffhus.dk/frame-TanzaniaZanzibar.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070715143811/http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/black_voices/voices_display.cfm?id=2 to http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/black_voices/voices_display.cfm?id=2
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:36, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on History of slavery. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://geocities.com/medievalnovgorod/nov10.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:14, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I added to the Civil War section... Rebel leaders Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, Nathan Bedford Forrest and others were slavers and slave-traders. 2601:580:1:235:2C15:3245:8D43:A133 (talk) 12:23, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rebel leaders Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee, Nathan Beford Forrest and others were Slavers and Slave-Traders 

message: This recent edit by Grufo seems to problematic for several reasons:
*It lists the 2018 list of countries with highest rate of slavery, yet the UN presents an additional list of countries with largest number of slaves: . Both these are from 2018. The GSI presents a 2019 list of countries "taking the least action to respond to modern slavery". I think that all three might belong in the article body, but none should be in the lead. Having 3 lists of 10 countries each in the lead would be make it unreadable.
*The edit introduced into the lead this phrase: . The source given is from 2011 and contradicts several sources that put the % of population in slavery at 2.1%: United Nations, Guardian and the Global Slavery Index. This discrepency should be discussed in the body of the article, but this article's lead is not the place for it.
*The edit makes mention of Mauritania three times in the lead! That seems quite WP:UNDUE in lead that is supposed to cover the entire history of slavery.
*Prior to the edit, ISIS' sex slavery was mentioned once in the lead, but the edit mentioned it a second time. I'm not sure what is the point of mentioning it twice.
*The edit curiously introduced Boko Haram to the lead. That group is far from the only Nigerian group involved in sex slavery (see Air Lords, Black Axe etc.) All of these groups should be discussed in the body. The edit also wrongly states that Boko Haram is a quasi-state. I don't think any source has considered it as such. 
VR talk 02:42, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edit 

message: This edit removed the entire section on the Soviet Union. Yet, there are many works on slavery in the USSR, including a book called Stalin's Slave Camps: an indictment of Modern Slavery, which was positively reviewed by Hugo Dewar in International Affairs and call's Stalin's penal manpower a "modern form of slavery" and "an integral part of the Soviet Union". A chapter on forced labor during the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany appears in the The Cambridge World History of Slavery vol 4. Illness and Inhumanity in Stalin's Gulag also documents slavery in the USSR. We also have articles like Stalin's legacy lives on in city that slaves built. The katorga is also considered a form of slave labor.VR talk 10:43, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: VR It looks like the section was restored, so feel free to add those references to it. 2001:569:7D8E:5300:9D1B:654F:C8B:52E1 (talk) 18:28, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  USSR 

message: :It does occur to me that this meme "enslaved person" is now a part of the history of slavery. Do we need a sentence or two in the article to outline its history to date? Perhaps "In the early 2000s, the use of the word "slave" has been deprecated and the word "enslaved person" has been thought to remind readers of the intrinsic personhood of every victim of slavery"? OK, it's arguably inappropriate recentism and of no use to the actual victims, but what do others think? Hunc (talk) 19:53, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: This crossed my mind also, however I think this topic has less to do with the "history of slavery" and more to do with the history of the use of the word slave.  It may be more appropriately entered here: [].  Ducky008 (talk) 20:39, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No, generally the place for the historiography of a subject is as a section in an article which covers its history. You would, however, have to find an RS that covers any language changewhich may be a challenge. What we have here on this talk page would be criticised as WP:OR if it were in an article. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 23:08, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems an entry on this does exist under "terminology", here, [| Slavery]Ducky008 (talk) 06:53, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: User:ThoughtIdRetired, You are right, this is just fodder for the local cafe, haha. There does appear to be numerous reliable published sources discussing the matter, like the following (found on the first page of a Google search): 1. Chicago Tribune - slave enslaved 2. Buffalo Library 3. SUNY - slave vs enslaved 4. Telfair Museum 5.Medium 6.  Slate.Ducky008 (talk) 23:22, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Historical use of words

message: Slave trade 41.170.85.178 (talk) 10:54, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social sciences 

message: I received your message. Just to be clear: from the wiki page of Liutprand there is written that it is of longobard origin, while here it is written: "italian ambassador"; I think that for coherence the nationality change should remain. 62.10.58.107 (talk) 20:20, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Liutprand of Cremona's family had Lombard origins but on his mission to Constantine VII he was serving as an Italian ambassador. Similarly, if this had happened during his mission to Nicephorus Phocas, we would describe him as a papal ambassador. We would only describe him as the Lombard ambassador if he was the ambasssador of Lombardy's ruler. NebY (talk) 22:32, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding the nationality change 

message: — Assignment last updated by Brooklyncox22 (talk) 18:25, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: HIST 2010 Early U.S. History

message: It is deceptive not to mention that most enslaved Africans were enslaved by other Africans from different ethnic groups and tribes 2601:589:407F:3B95:956F:D495:247D:2EEA (talk) 00:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, now try reading the article. After the short slavery in antiquity section, the very first thing you encounter is the slavery in Africa section. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇 01:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  No mention of the fact that Africans captured and enslaved other Africans 

message: User:Taksen, please review this edit of yours.  You inserted this paragraph:
Did you mean the slave trade *in* instead of *on* Spanish America?  And what does “providing Dutch, British and French America from the Caribbean islands were there organized depots” mean? Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I have tried to fix it. Anythingyouwant (talk) 17:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typos make this very difficult to understand 

message: The article states that Spain was the first country in abolishing slavery in 1542, but it omits that the New Laws were never completely enforced and only referred to indigenous slavery. Black slavery was pretty much alive in the Spanish Empire well into XIX century. 
Also, at some point it states that slavery in Brazil was not race-based without a source (race was the main factor in slavery in Brazil as it is clear by the influx of enslaved Africans entering the colony fron the Portuguese outposts in what is now modern Angola).
Also, the different sections have a big imbalance with respect to the information covered. For instance, slavery in America and European colonies is much less addressed than other slavery, it does not seem to have a clear and common axis for the information, and it has an scarcity of sources. 181.53.12.244 (talk) 04:07, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect statement on Spanish slavery and unbalanced information 

message: Slavery 160.238.138.3 (talk) 22:24, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social studies 

message: — Assignment last updated by Cuttera24 (talk) 15:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: ARCN 211 Material Histories of Labor

message: Due to the same slave trades taking part in multiple continents it created a situation on this wiki page that they’re repeated between continent tabs that have their own separate information, I believe it’d bring much more organization chronological wise and easier reading to organize the history of slavery based on date rather than continent
Bobisland (talk) 20:50, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I’m combining Ottoman Empire and moving Barbary pirates into Asia for better organization Bobisland (talk) 22:48, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ? They were based in Africa, and mostly taking slaves from Europe to the Ottoman Empire. I realize the article is rather a mess, but I think a move to a more chronological treatment would not help. A firmer layout distinuishing between "Slaves from Foo" and "Slaves carried to Foo" might help. Johnbod (talk) 23:12, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Organization would be made easier if the categories of MENA could be separated into its own tab from Asia and Africa as the Muslim world is often historically connected between each other Bobisland (talk) 19:59, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think this wiki page should be organized by time and not continent