text:
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Toronto

Proposed article for creation: Ford Family Tree
Hi there, I'm currently hashing out a family tree for the Ford family dynasty on one of my sandbox pages (the family tree template is not user friendly let's just say that) I was wondering if anyone who had more experience with this sort of thing could help work on it. It's here: User:CaffeinAddict/sandbox/2. CaffeinAddict (talk) 07:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like and turns it into something like
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from cite web, cite journal and doi.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

-   Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Discussion at Content assessment
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Content assessment, which is within the scope of this WikiProject.  This WikiProject received this message because it currently uses "Current" and/or "Future" class(es). There is a proposal to split these two article "classes" into a new parameter "time", in order to standardise article-rating across Wikipedia (per RfC), while also allowing simultaneous usage of quality criteria and time for interest projects. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:10, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Second Harvest
Hello WP:Toronto members! I'm Dom from Second Harvest. We're looking to have our Wikipedia page be more fully fleshed out - would love to have it have more content and be more helpful to users. Cross-posting to a few WPs :) Domeniquebs (talk) 14:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

2024 July 7 Meetup in Toronto, photo-walk, and edit-a-thon
I would like to invite interested editors to the July meeting of the Toronto WikiClub. We've planned a photo walk and edit-a-thon. –xenotalk 17:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Toronto


text:
Talk:Montagnard (Vietnam)

Severe NPV issues
FFS. The "2004 Mass Protest" section is longer than War and Peace. Either someone's made this their hobbyhorse; astonishingly poor writers are attracted to the Degar; or propaganda is at work. Needs flagging. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:18CB:C900:1420:C876:BA1:206F (talk) 14:58, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

More information
Visit this site for more information about Degar people: http://www.montagnard-foundation.org/about-degar.html
 * Seen it; thanks for the pointer! Hephaestos

merge with Montagnard
It seems like these two articles share a lot of the same information, the article on Degar even explicitly says that Degar is just another name for Montangard. It seems like Montagnard is the better known term and the better developed article, so I suggest we merge Degar into Montagnard. --Misfit (talk) 17:06, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd support this as well. Intothatdarkness 20:19, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

genocide

 * This has prompted several human rights organizations to argue that the Degar are subject to an ongoing and continual genocide by the current Vietnamese government.

This is a weasel worded sentence. Which human rights organizations? This sentence should include the name of the most respectable human rights organizations which have made this accusation. --Philip Baird Shearer 10:11, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I have done a little digging using Google. One of the organisations on the net which calls the Vietnamese government's actions genocdide is the The Montagnard Foundation, Inc. (MFI) eg MFI Report 2002-2003 HR-Page 5

The Human Rights Watch (HRW) say in it's 2002 report on the Conflicts over Land and Religion in Vietnam's Central Highlands:
 * ''An Independent Homeland
 * ''When the U.S.-based Montagnard Foundation, Inc. (MFI), led by Jarai-American Kok Ksor, launched a renewed effort to build support for an independent "Dega" homeland in 2000, it found an extremely receptive audience. While many MFI members, and highlanders in general, are former FULRO supporters, there is no indication that there was any armed component to MFI's efforts and, to Human Right Watch's knowledge, MFI has never advocated the use of violence as a means of achieving independence.

It is clear that the MFI may be a human rights organisation but it has an overtly political agenda.

The web page (Action Alert and News Bulletins Vietnam's Montagnard Refugees in Cambodia) mentions genocide but it turns out to be in letters to newspapers. On this issue HRW says Vietnam: No Montagnard Repatriation Without Protection but it does not use the word genocide.

One of the letters if from Michael "Mike" Benge. On this web site it says "The author spent 11 years in Vietnam as a Foreign Service Officer and worked closely with the Montagnards during that time. Of those 11 years, 5 were as a Prisoner of War. Upon his release in 1973, he returned as a volunteer to Vietnam and continued his work with the Montagnards. He continues to work with the Montagnards in the United States and on behalf of those remaining in Vietnam as an advisor to the Montagnard Human Rights Organization (MHRO) in North Carolina." It is not clear that MHRO is a human rights organisation without an overtly political adjenda.

For the allegations of genocide to be included in this article I think we need a better source than these, or if these have to be used then the wording should reflect that they are from organisations with an overt political agenda --Philip Baird Shearer 11:33, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

As no one has provided a source for the genocide allegations, I have removed the sentence from the article please provide a Reliable source before reinstating it. --Philip Baird Shearer 19:36, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

genocide
Mr. Shearer; with all due respect, it is difficult to know what other word to use to describe the actions toward the Dega (aka Degar) people who are the aboriginal inhabitants of the area now known as Vietnam. They have been persecuted by the people we now know as Vietnamese since their arrival in Indo-China over a thousand years ago.

The incomers treated the Dega and other aboriginal inhabitants as animals. They exterminated them where possible, or drove them from the fertile lowland regions into the rugged mountainous regions they inhabit today. Indeed, they still refer to them as "monkey-people" and do not recognize their language as human to this very day - I have heard them use this term myself less than two years ago.

In more recent and "enlightened" times, they have forced them to intermarry with the Viets, and be educated only in Vietnamese, in order to eliminate them as a distinct genetic and ethno-linguistic group. In short, their policies in times past and to this day are distinctly genocidal, in that they seek to exterminate or absorb the Dega and other ethnic minorities in Vietnam.

When I served in Vietnam (1967-8), I was a member of the Combined Action program, a USMC "hearts and minds" program. (There is an article on CAP, which I have contributed to, elsewhere on WIkipedia.) CAP Marines lived in the villages in squad-sized units (about 12-15 men) and ran defensive operations, military training for the RF-PF  (militia) units, and performed civic action such as medical work, wells, etc. CAP worked mainly among the Vietnamese in the lowlands, but I had the singular honor of working among the Bru of the Highlands in the vicinity of Khe Sanh.

I personally witnessed instances of Vietnamese hostility towards these people, ranging from petty discrimination to brutal treatment including torture. One of our corporals stopped the torture of a Bru (the local Dega tribe) by the RVN Viet police chief in Khe Sanh. The chief initially refused the corporal's demand to cease, so the corporal pulled his .45 pistol and leveled it at him, telling him he would shoot him if he didn't stop - which he (wisely) did. The corporal was later decorated for his action, but transferred because of the rancor of the police chief and the possibility it would occur again. (Of course, that was in the days when torture was at least nominally disapproved of by the US.)

After the fall of Saigon, many Bru and other Dega and ethnic minorities, as well as Viets who had assisted us or supported the Saigon regime, were killed outright. Others were put in "re-education" camps and tortured. I know many who later escaped and live in the US now. All bear cars of their ordeals. One had his hand cut off at the wrist for attempting to tunnel his way out. Of course, that was based at least partly on their having supported the losing side, and to be fair, Viets were also tortured and murdered by the new regime. Their plight has been made worse by the fact that many have professed Christianity in recent years, despite brutal persecution, particularly of evangelical Protestant sects (which the bulk of the Bru tribe now belong to).

Many of my comrades have traveled back there since, and report that the situation is little improved. The Bru are still being driven back and dispossessed, as the new regime has sent many Viets into the region to settle the land. The Bru are still being "encouraged" to intermarry. Their customs, language, and culture are still being suppressed. This is as late as last year.

In summary, I again ask - if this is not "genocide" then what should it be called? It is true that it is not on the scale of what Hitler carried out in WW II, or what Stalin did in Russia - it doesn't even come up to Pol Pot's killing fields - but this is (at least partially) more a factor of the relative size of the populations and their relative isolation until recent times.

To clarify my own position, I am not against the Vietnamese, nor ever was, even when I was fighting there - I know and like many of them, and have contributed to programs like East Meets West, and other ventures bringing aid to them, as well as those helping the Bru and other Dega people. I have no antipathy towards any of the people of Asia, even those I opposed in the war. Indeed, I would very much like to meet some of former opponents I personally faced in combat if they could be identified. I have no "political agenda" - I no longer support that war (or any war, incl, the present one), nor do I support the current regime (though I didn't support the former one either), nor even the capitalist system they support (nor do I support the opposing systems).

However, what the Vietnamese have done and are doing to the Dega and other ethnic minorities, while no different from or worse than what was done to the Native Americans, the African-Americans, the Australian Aborigines, or virtually any people in history who have been displaced, destroyed,and/or enslaved, is certainly a form of genocide in my understanding of that word.

As to whether my personal experiences and those of my comrades will constitute a "Wikipedia-Reliable source" for you or others, I am not sure - but it is true, nonetheless, and based on personal experience and that of others whose word I trust implicitly. I would, however, submit that it should be at least as worthy as that of groups outside that country, most of whom have never been there - or at least unaccompanied by members of the current regime there.

If you or anyone else has any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. I prefer E-mail, and you can get in direct touch by visiting my CAP memorial site ( http://www.cap-oscar.org ) and using the form there. I will respond by direct E.

Respectfully,

F. J. Taylor

Seamus45 (talk) 19:50, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello,

I just wanted to say that I appreciate your in-depth knowledge about the persecutions the Montagnards have faced, F. J. Taylor. As a Montagnard myself, it is evident that much of our history and culture has been lost and forgotten. Many Vietnamese people today do not even know about us, and what we have been through, especially Vietnamese-Americans. Thank you for your contribution. Zina98 (talk) 18:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC) Zina Y

Extreme Prejudice
After reading the entry in favor of using the term "genocide", I agree that there appears to be a great deal of hostility shown to the Degar people and other indigenous minority groups but I do not believe genocide is the appropriate term in this case. The term that I think fits best would be extreme prejudice.

There is nothing wrong with different ethnic groups marrying into each other. Doing so would actually be beneficial to survival due to gene pool diversity. This may even be considered another form of inter-racial joining. The treatment of the Degar people by the Viet people may be deplorable and inhumane at times but it is far from genocide. Furthermore, you will find communities in all parts of the world where one group of people will consider themselves above another group.

71.142.52.0 (talk) 08:48, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Redirect from Moi tribe ?
I understand that the term moi, meaning savages in Vietnamese, was formerly applied to these people. There are numerous references in older literature that use the terms moi or moi tribe or moi culture. H. Maître (1909) Les Régions Moi du Sud-lndochinois: Le plateau de DarlacExample 2, Example 3 While the term moi in European sources seems to have been mostly applied to the minorities of the Central Highlands (but also to more northern mountain tribes in Vietnam, Laos and Yunnan), in Vietnamese it was a more general term and seems to have been used broadly much like the current Vietnamese term. Currently there is no cross-reference from the Moi (disambiguation) page to this article. Although the term was derogatory in Vietnamese, it was not so used in the European sources. It seems to me that a cross-reference from the Moi (disambiguation) page to this article would be appropriate. Other viewpoints? --Bejnar (talk) 19:43, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Seeing no comments, I have added a redirect from Moi culture, and an entry for Moi culture on the Moi (disambiguation) page. --Bejnar (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Degar. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mhro.org/montangards-history/conclusions

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 II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:07, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Pictures
http://jean.marie.lambert.perso.sfr.fr/vietnam_centre_et_sud.htm https://matricien.org/geo-hist-matriarcat/asie/rhade-ede/ https://www.facebook.com/tessamconieart/posts/420116394816412 http://www.tessamconie.com.au/#!blog/ctkd http://www.tessamconie.com.au/#!Vietnam-Highlanders/c22zv/5507dc280cf27b8ab29b4288 http://www.tessamconie.com.au/#!MUSEOct-2015/c22zv/55079d7a0cf27b8ab29a4ee1

Rajmaan (talk) 04:34, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Degar vs Montagnard
The article states:

> The term "Degar" is generally used only by people connected with Kok Ksor and the Degar Foundation. Most of those living in America refer to themselves as Montagnards, while those living in Vietnam refer to themselves by their individual tribe.

So why is Degar a suitable name for the article? Zekelayla (talk) 00:40, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

 * That is an excellent question. All the sources I've seen use "Montagnard", and this appears a term of self-identification as well.  The answer seems to be "it was started at Degar."  The problem is that a loooot of hte sources are very Vietnam War centric, which is a rather skewed view, but I suspect that even excluding them, Montagnard wins out.  Perhaps a WP:RM should be filed?  SnowFire (talk) 00:50, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 1 May 2019

 * 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Procedural close (not moved). (nac by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  18:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Degar → Indigenous peoples of the Central Highlands of Vietnam – People say throughout the Talk Page that Montagnard is apparently offensive, but they also say "Degar" is not very common, so why not title like the US and Mexican Indigenous peoples articles: Indigenous peoples of the Americas and Indigenous peoples of Mexico? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:601:1500:bca7:d042:b1b5:bc2f:8c04 (talk) 05:25, 1 May 2019 (UTC) --Relisted.  Paine Ellsworth ,  ed.  put'r there  17:32, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Note 1: This is an old, malformed request that has been fixed and restarted. The start timestamp for closing purposes is 17:26, 15 August 2019 (UTC). Please do not close for at least seven days from that time and date.  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  17:30, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note 2: see Talk:Persecution of indigenous peoples of the Central Highlands in Vietnam for associated request.  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  17:40, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

 * - Can I have leave to modify this request / speedily close this one and make a new one? It's not gonna happen and was proposed by an IP address who was accused of sockpuppetry elsewhere and isn't around, and is a pretty bad suggestion.  I'd be happy to open a new RM to "Montagnard" which I think is more likely to succeed.  SnowFire (talk) 18:18, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Be very pleased if you did so, thank you!  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  18:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

 * 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.

Requested move 15 August 2019

 * 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved. See no objections below, so this is more like a tech move than not. Kudos to the nom for your input, and Happy Publishing! (nac by page mover)  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  16:16, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Degar → Montagnard (Vietnam) – This is the least problematic name for this article. Most importantly, it is the most common both among the group themselves (self-identification) and is the most prominent term in English. See below for details. SnowFire (talk) 20:03, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Let's discuss our options, all of which have problems:

 * Degar - This is a fringe term promoted by one group of exiles in South Carolina, the Degar Foundation. It's seen a little usage outside them, and the usage that does exist may partially be influenced by Wikipedia picking the term.  Note that their website also uses the term "Montagnard" which shows that even they haven't escaped it entirely, and their Wikipedia article is even at Montagnard Foundation, Inc. (which seems weird, but what do I know).  GBooks has 2.8K hits.

 * Montagnard - This is unquestionably the most popular term in French & English, but this is partially because of the Vietnam War meaning that a lot of our sources are locked in what the term was in the 1960s. Nevertheless, this is the preferred term of self-identification for most groups in the United States, and at least some in Vietnam?  See https://cnnc.uncg.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/montagnards.pdf for a 2012 example that shows the term is the preferred one in the North Carolina Montagnard community.  https://books.google.com/books?id=5y57UQ9PozEC&lpg=PP1&pg=PA17#v=onepage&q&f=false is a 2001 example that consistently uses Montagnard.  GBooks has 29K hits, 10x Degar - even if we throw away half of them as being related to the Vietnam War, that's 5x the rate.

 * người Thượng - The lede claims this is a Vietnamese term, but this is entirely unsourced, and Google Books turns up exactly 1 book in English that even mentions that term, and these groups have their own non-Vietnamese indigenous languages anyway nor consider themselves Vietnamese, so this isn't really much better than a French term.

 * Moi - This term is a deragotary exonym that isn't used by the group themselves and is dated anyway.

 * Indigenous peoples of the Central Highlands of Vietnam - What this article was briefly moved to. Long & unwieldly, and doesn't reflect the diaspora experience at all.

Given these, Montagnard is the best - it's not perfect, but as close as we're going to see. SnowFire (talk) 20:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Just a quick question of a technical nature. Is this subject the primary topic? If yes, then the move Montagnard → Montagnard (disambiguation) should be added to this request. If this is not the primary topic, then a suitable qualfifer, such as "Vietnam" in Montagnard (Vietnam) should be included in the target of this request. Let me know which way you want to go, because the dab page should be tagged if this is the ptopic.  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  00:04, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Whoops, I made the above in a bit of a rush. You're entirely correct.  Adjusted the nom.  SnowFire (talk) 00:31, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much!  Paine Ellsworth , ed.  put'r there  14:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

 * 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.

Recent additions
103.186.155.74 : You've added some good material here. That said... you seem to be a bit indiscriminate, and also not quite quoting the material accurately in parts. For example, I think you seem to have entirely created the "revolt of 1929"; the source is very clear that it was just a "few" attacks, so this was hardly a revolt. Saying that the US & South Vietnam "misinterpreted" things by creating the Montagnard identity is also missing the point; it might be relevant that they helped push it as an identity, but this is true of all nationalisms. They're all "created" things, every single one, so there's nothing special about saying that Montagnards were also something of a "created" group. A mailing list debate (I presume you were referencing this) is not really a good source. Specific US DOD documents are primary sources and also not really great sources, nor were they used for anything "interesting" (it's well-known and understood that there was lots of bombing in the Vietnam War). The Liann Yamashita article - I know it's technically a journal, but it's not really a prestigious one, and Yamashita appears to just be a student, not a Professor or anything. And further, it was just some quotes from specific interviews, so a fairly weak source about North Carolina Montagnards as a whole - better to use stuff like the News & Observer.

I've combined some of the references - there's no need to repeat the full book citation every time. I haven't had a chance to go through the Vietnam War section yet, but... having a political opinion is fine, but we do prefer to avoid "jargon" on Wikipedia. Basically this means don't use specific-to-Marxism terms that will cause lots of English language readers to tune out. SnowFire (talk) 04:10, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Montagnard (Vietnam)


text:
Talk:AtheOS

From this page: AtheOS is a free Unix-like operating system for x86-based computers.

From the AtheOS website: AtheOS is not meant to be a new Unix clone (like Linux and *BSD) but a new clean desktop OS.

Ok, not that I know anything about AtheOS, but I'm confused to say the least.

 * I can see why :) I think what he meant is that he didn't specifically intend to create a typical command-line-system-with-lots-of-confuddling-directories-and-scripts Unix clone (or AmigaOS & BeOS clone for that matter), but a graphical desktop OS with an integrated gui & its own wiget set, which happened to end up being Unix-like and partially Posix(sp?)-compliant. An AtheOS system doesn't make use of X-Windows, GTK & QT, but does make use of GCC & BaSH, and can run Posix(sp?)-compliant programs with a minimal of porting work. I'm not a kernel-hacker, so I'm no expert on the subject, but to the best of my knowledge it is a Unix-like OS, and is considered as such by others too. If I'm wrong, don't be afraid to say why. Kurt Sk. seems to have halted all work on AtheOS about a year ago, and is now interested in aircraft. Why he would want to dump a huge hobby he had invested 6 years of work into and had almost completed nearly single-handedly remains unknown.

 * Actually AtheOS was originally started in 1994 as an AmigaOS clone, but that objective was abandoned. It was called "AltOS" before being renamed to AtheOS too. There're a couple of old screenshots floating around from before the name-change. Crusadeonilliteracy
 * Windows NT is fully POSIX-compliant (unlike AtheOS and even Linux) and we do not call it Unix-like.--Dojarca 15:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Please could someone verify that AtheOS was originally started as an Amiga clone. None of sources confirm this. I also dont see why AtheOS should be classified as AmigaOS-like since it is not an Amiga clone. What defines AmigaOS-like? Xorxos (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Is AtheOS Amiga clone?
I tried to find references where AtheOS is claimed to be initially an Amiga (OS) clone. I could not find any reference and links in the article did not help. Therefore I added "citation needed" (fact) tag there. Now there is reference but it is still only saying that "Its UI looks like the Amiga one, but underneath you will most probably see a lot of similarities to BeOS, while it has very good POSIX support, making the Unix application porting, easier.". I checked some AtheOS screenshots and in my opinion it does not even remotely look like the Amiga one. Definitely it is not a proof for AmigaOS clone intentions. I do remember hearing about AmigaOS clone intentions but it is odd that I can not find such claims from the AtheOS website or author's interviews.

I also suggest that this article is removed from AmigaOS category: it does not run AmigaOS software, it is not AmigaOS API compatible and it does not claim usage of Amiga related technology (AmigaGuide, IFF, not even datatypes). Even if it was initially intended as AmigaOS clone it is not one. Xorxos (talk) 20:27, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:AtheOS