Talk:Northern Ndebele people

message: For the time being I have removed the reference to "animist" beliefs. It appears to be used in Wikipedia exclusively to describe supernatural beliefs held by black people -- white British, American or German people who believe in ghosts and spirits are not generally referred to as animists. If anyone can suggest a more neutral term I'd be grateful. Humansdorpie 18:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Animist 

message: For dedicated editors of this page: The "Related Groups" info was removed from all  infoboxes. Comments may be left on the Ethnic groups talk page. Ling.Nut 23:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The northern ndebele 

message: Would anyone care to explain in what way they think it's unbalanced? It needs expansion, but the tag doesn't seem warranted to me. 128.135.230.219 (talk) 20:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: "Twentieth Century"

message: See Bantu category hierarchy on Commons for how it should be. The categories here may need renaming rather than recategorising articles in them and edit warring over it. If you look at the main article linked to :Category:Bantu people, you will see it is intended for Bantu peoples not Bantu people (individuals). HelenOnline 07:58, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that there is only a Bantu peoples article give as the 'catmain' does not mean that the ethno category title should be "Bantu people"....singular; I contemplated a CFDS on this to match that main article name, i.e. :Category:Bantu peoples, but :Category:Bantu exists and that is the normal form for main ethno categories; NOT "FOO people" in the singular, which overwhelmingly is for "individuals who are FOO".  The edit war is a nuisance and made completely with illogical edit comments = "just the opposite: there are no individual Bantu people"....if that is the case, then :Category:Bantu people should be deleted; :Category:Bantu is not about one or two articles, it's about all peoples classed as Bantu peoples; not about singular-people individuals.Skookum1 (talk) 16:31, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, your edit comment also makes no sense "Bantu cat is broader than peoples"....how so?  :Category:Bantu is for "all things Bantu, including subgroups and more; of which "people who are Bantu" is a subset; since, as the edit warrior who opposed all things Skookum1, is correct in his assertion that "there are no Bantu people" i.e. "Bantu individuals", then there should be no such cat; the subcats may be poorly titled relative to normal category tree standards for ethno articles, e.g. there is no :Category:Ovambo parent for :Category:Ovambo people, but that is easily remedied.  The "FOO people" ambiguity is why that disambiguation was avoided for category and main article titles; FOO was used, very widely, to avoid any such complications, and to leave "FOO people" for "people who are FOO" or "people who are from FOO" individual bios to be subcatted.Skookum1 (talk) 16:39, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Please join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2014 May 24#Category:Bantu people. HelenOnline 16:41, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

text: Based on your comments above, you clearly haven't read through my comment above or the Commons link in it or the CFD proposal. Edit warring and flying off the handle without even listening first is pretty pointless and unconstructive. I am trying to sort this mess out, not gatecrash your edit warring party. HelenOnline 16:50, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Launching a CfD when all you had to do was create :Category:Bantu peoples and move some things around is "flying off the handle"; I moved articles about peoples into the main cat where they belong; they do not belong in "Bantu people"; it's you that's making the fuss.....and the other edit-warrior whose agenda is that "FOO people" should be for everything "FOO".  You partook in his edit war, rather than simply make the needed :Category:Bantu peoples.  Shut down your needless CfD and just make the category and start sorting out what belongs where; I might have myself by now if not busy elsewhere; dragging things to discussion boards when there are simple actions to take is all too common and is a waste of time and energy.Skookum1 (talk) 01:37, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bantu category edit war 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Northern Ndebele people. 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/20090211071232/http://www.sokwanele.com/pdfs/BTS.pdf to http://www.sokwanele.com/pdfs/BTS.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:45, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Amandebele. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 2#Amandebele until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:51, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Amandebele" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: It is correct that the ZAPU movement led by Joshua Nkomo was dominated by Ndebele, but Nkomo himself was not Ndebele, he was Kalanga, a Shona sub-group allied with the Ndebele. 
Noel Ellis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noel Ellis (talk • contribs) 04:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  ==========================