Talk:Bamar people

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 16:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "related groups" info removed from infobox 

message: Do you think we could use a picture without a face in shadow? Or better yet, multiple photos? Brutannica (talk) 07:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, if you can find freely licensed photos. Most articles on ethnic groups use several photos of famous people who belong to the ethnicity. Do we have free pictures of Aung San Suu Kyi and U Thant? Who else is a famous Bamar? —Angr 10:35, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: I reverted Burmese people back to its original stub and added cleanup suggestions. It was 
redirecting to Bamar, which I felt was misleading as the latter covers only 68% of a set of people. Please also see :Category:Burmese people. 84user (talk) 15:45, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The point of a stub is that it can be expanded. What can be said about Burmese people that isn't said either here or at Demographics of Burma? +Angr 16:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I was thinking of something like the articles French people or German people. Or it could redirect to List of ethnic groups in Burma which could be further expanded. I do not know where it could best lead. 84user (talk) 22:41, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... Germans is about an ethnic group and so is more parallel to Bamar. But you're right about French people: it's rather pointedly not about an ethnic group and so could serve as a model for Burmese people. The article could discuss who is eligible for Burmese citizenship and residency, summarize the ethnicities, religions and languages in Burma, and discuss Burmese communities abroad. OK, I'm convinced. +Angr 06:20, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Burmese people]] 

message: Per WP:COMMONNAME, shouldn't this article be at Burman people or Burmans? — kwami (talk) 08:06, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not convinced that is the common name in contemporary academic discussion. It sounds rather old-fashioned to me, though it's probably still used by nonspecialists. But both those links should probably redirect here, or to Burmese people, rather than being redlinks. —Angr (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: How about the English pronunciation, then? I'm not finding it in dictionaries. — kwami (talk) 14:12, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The mar is the same as the mar of Myanmar, i.e.  in nonrhotic English (emulating the Burmese), and the spelling pronunciation  in rhotic English. The romanization of both Bamar and Myanmar was obviously devised by a nonrhotic speaker (unsurprisingly given Burma's colonial history). —Angr (talk) 23:28, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, it's non-rhotic. Hybernator (talk) 05:27, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  move? 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Deletion requests June 2011 
;What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:29, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Burman-bamar.png Nominated for Deletion

message: The common name for these people is "Burmans". Please take a look at Ngrams. The phrase "Bamar people" is not even found in any books. Attempts to cleanse "Burmans" / "Burman" from this page will be met with resistance. RGloucester  — ☎ 17:40, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Google Ngrams isn't a source. "Burmans" is old-fashioned and somewhat offensive. It's like saying "Orientals" instead of "Asians". You need to stop edit-warring now, and you also need to not revert other edits unrelated to the issue at hand. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:54, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not "offensive", nor is it "old-fashioned". You have no sources for that utter tosh. It is the standard term, and Ngrams confirms that. No one knows what a "Bamar" is. If it were "offensive", it would not be used by the Encylopaedia Brittanica. RGloucester  — ☎ 20:59, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common name is "Burmans" 

message: IP (121.214.38.248, 137.147.156.39), where in the two studies you posted does it say the Bamar or Burmese have "significant East Asian and Indian influences"? 
* The first study by Sumerer et al says no such thing. I've read the entire study a few times, and I don't see it anywhere. The abstract says "... the Myanmar haplogroup distribution showed a typical Southeast Asian pattern, but also Northeast Asian and Indian influences." It's a study of 327 people from Myanmar living in northern Thailand. No one from Mandalay Region, arguably the Bamar heartland was represented! Read it. Anyway, if you can find a page that support your "significant" assertion, let's see it.
* The second one Afghan Hindu Kush: Where Eurasian Sub-Continent Gene Flows Converge doesn't even cover Myanmar. It mentions no Burmese, no Burman, no Bamar, no Karen, no Shan. You said "literally". Where? Which pages? Why did you even put this up as a citation?
So, how did you make the leap to "Genetic studies" and "significant"? 
Just stick to the facts, IP. You can't just slap on a couple of links and start making claims that the studies don't make. Provide specific pages, which you never did--for obvious reasons. And btw, (Sumerer et al 2004: 1, 7) is the one I added, and doesn't support your assertions in any case. Hybernator (talk) 06:41, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: DNA studies

message: The tradition says that, as far as I can remember. And according to https://journals.equinoxpub.com/BSR/article/view/17899, the Sakya clan was definitely non-Indo-Aryan and non-Vedic. They worshipped trees, tree spirits (read nats!) and nagas, activities which look like Burmese to me. 2100s (talk) 02:44, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buddha was a Bamar 

message: The term Bamar is Burglish form of Burman which is used by the former military junta. There are other examples including Karen to Kayin. However, people prefer to use the term Burman and Karen instead of newly created terms Bamar or Kayin. Smartburmese (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title should be the Burman people. 

message: According to the 23andme, most Bamars are quite polluted with Indian and Chinese DNAs. Seems like the British genocided them. 71.202.21.101 (talk) 05:25, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polluted race 

message: Some random students from Wiki:Edu have added various nonsense to this article. I have removed them all. Zaww8 (talk) 12:08, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You need to explain why this is not reliably sourced, undue, or just not relevant. --RegentsPark (comment) 12:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: What the hell. It's an ethnic article. You can't add "genocide" and stupid politics "Rohingya" citizenship in every article. It's not relevant at all. Can you find genocides in Americans or even White Americans? Zaww8 (talk) 12:40, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: What should be added instead was that they were VICTIMS of genocide by the British. Massive inflows of Bengali genes to Yangon can be found in many studies, due to the British destorying everything and opening up the entire country for a demographic genocide. Zaww8 (talk) 14:17, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiki:Edu BS