Talk:White people in Zimbabwe

Usefulness to the World

Really, guys? Whites in Zimbabwe? You really wrote an entire article about it? With photos of white people from Zimbabwe? Yikes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.112.252.166 (talk) 02:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Funny I am just a reader who was interested in this topic and thought the general article idea was good. The execution however is not so great. Here are some specifics:

You say "a small number of Europeans". Provide a approximate number or range. Both 100 and 100,0000 could be small in this context.

You say "the country now known as Zimbabwe" but it wasn't that when the Euros came, what was it then. Provide historical context.

You mention illegal partition. Illegal under what law? The acronyms used are not well known.

Extinction of white Rhodesians as a national community

Beneaththelandslide. You have described the following item as "biased, sob story, rubbish" and deleted it from the main article:

QUOTE I was the first black girl at an all white school in Zimbabwe in 1979. I was seven years old and very afraid. One of my little classmates chose to spit in my face for being a kaffir. That affected me terribly and sent me on my nationalistic journey.

"Africa for Africans," I said to anyone who cared to listen.

When, the following year on November 11 (a) the whole school sang the Rhodesian national anthem (b), which incidentally I didn't know because as a black child I had never learnt it, I realised that white people will never change and they had to leave our country.

Tambu – Zimbabwean (reported by BBC)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/witness/march/2/newsid_3497000/3497239.stm

notes : (a) anniversary of UDI (b) “Rise O Voices of Rhodesia” (sung to Beethoven’s ‘Ode to Joy’) UNQUOTE

Why do you feel this is "biased, sob-story, rubbish"?. Do you not feel that the disappearance of whites from Zimbabwe requires an explanation?. This is a friendly enquiry. I am interested to hear your views. Bob BScar23625 13:43, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Because it is biased sob-story rubbish. Someone could just as easily find a little crying girl from another colour/ethnic group/political persuasion and use their tears as political leverage. It's also interesting that out of all the quotes both praising/attacking various leaders/stances/regimes you choose to use that particular one. - G^t 13:57, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Beneaththelandslide. OK - but what is your explanation for the disappearance of the Rhodesian white community?. Take Kenya as a comparable case. I believe (feel free to correct me, anyone)that there now more whites in the country than there were at the time of its independence. I take the multi-ethnic view, that a variety of ethnic groups living in a nation is a good thing. Why do you think the whites/Brits/Europeans (call them what you like) have effectively vanished from Zimbabwe?.

best wishes. Bob BScar23625 15:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I have no intention of entering into a discussion. - G^t 15:51, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

You don't want to talk then that is up to you, old boy. Bob BScar23625 15:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Still Rhodesians?

While those who grew up in what was then called Rhodesia may regard themselves as Rhodesians, those whites who grew up in post-independence Zimbabwe regard themselves as Zimbabweans. Whatever their dislike of Mugabe, they are intelligent enough to realise that Rhodesia ain't coming back. They're from 'Zim'.

Quiensabe 20 January 2006 06:02 UTC

What you say is true. But the fact is that most white Rhodesians/Zimbabweans are now expatriates and my impression is that they generally call themselves Rhodesians. Bob BScar23625 09:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

the 2000 election and white participation in the MDC

Martey. You have deleted the following section of text.

"But it has been suggested that whites were a little too eager to involve themselves in opposition politics, given the sensitive history of whites in the country. Ethnic minorities are often wise to keep a low profile in their host countries."

An appreciation of events surrounding the MDC and the 2000 election is essential to give any sense of the recent history of whites in Zimbabwe. There is no element of opinion in the statement. So, I will reword that section of text and re-insert it. Unless you have any comments. Bob BScar23625 08:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

It is obviously a biased statement. The phrase "host country" indicates that they are guests in the country in which they are (for the most part) born and are citizens. Furthermore 1) who has suggested this? 2) the last sentence is clearly an opinion, not a fact. --Batmacumba (talk) 08:00, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

White MPs in the 2000-2005 Parliament

David. You have corrected the reported number from 6 to 4. Are you sure that is right?. Check out Timothy Stamps [1] Bob BScar23625 05:36, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

The reference in the text is to the number of white MPs elected - and see Zimbabwe parliamentary elections, 2000 for the full election results. Timothy Stamps evidently held one of the places in the Parliament that was appointed by the President. David | Talk 21:53, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

David. My recollection is that Stamps was a constituency Assembly member up to 2000, but suffered some sort of de-selection in that year. He then returned to Parliament as a non-constituency member. But, I believe the non-constituency selection process does involve a form of election, so whether or not he can be described as having been "elected" is a fine point. I am pretty sure there were 6 white MPs in 2000. Bob BScar23625 06:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Depending on outside events I should be able on Friday to go up to Colindale and get the 1995 election results from the Zimbabwe Herald. Incidentally, do you happen to know anywhere in Britain which has the archive of the Sunday Mail? I need a 1970 edition which is not in Colindale. The only place I have found it so far is the Rhodes House Library in Oxford. David | Talk 19:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

David. I have a vague memory that 'Colindale' is an outpost of the British Library, where the newspaper archives are held. That is the limit of my knowledge on such matters. I take it you are up for election on Thursday?. Good luck. Bob BScar23625 20:56, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

ps I see you came top of the poll with a very convincing majority. [2] Congratulations. Bob BScar23625 19:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Good article nom on hold

This needs a more thorough review but is doing pretty well in most respects. However, at present, virtually every single image copyright information is wrong or seriously dodgy.

The fact that something is a postcard photo does emphatically not mean that the photographer released all rights, even if it is hard to identify the photographer.

Just because something has a boiler template for fair use doesn't mean there's no need to write a fair use rationale too. Read the templates, at the bottom they ask for a fair use rationales.

All the images, and especially "fair use" ones, should have sources. Currently not all do.

Some of the items tagged as "political posters or leaflets" really don't look like they are.

Some of the fair use rationale reasoning is plain weird. For instance, the fact that something is a newspaper photo is an indication weighing against, not in favor of, fair use - newspapers pay a lot of money for their photographs, and they do have continuing value in archives because they are often brought out as stock photos if that person gets into the news again.

Above all, it's worth thinking carefully about the degree to which fair use images are being used at all in article like this. The government material is a very strong case - the idealized image of "Rhodesian life" that was being sold to white immigrants is a key point of this article. It seems likely to me that a fair use claim for a picture of an individual is much stronger on their own article page than on a page like this. Are there really no alternative free images of any white Zimbabweans? TheGrappler 01:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Grappler. Thanks for your comments, which I accept. It is not easy to fix the matter of the images - which are central to the article. So, I will withdraw the GA nomination. Bob BScar23625 05:01, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

ps the Fair Use status of the Chelsy Davy image was specifically agreed with Administrator RadioKirk, see my personal Talk page. BScar23625 07:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Context on Nicholas van Hoogstraten

I have reinserted the edits I made the other day, to include the phrases "controversial British developer" and "whose conviction of manslaughter was overturned on a technicality" because I believe these to be useful context for any casual reader who might wish to better assess the value of Nicholas van Hoogstraten praising Robert Mugabe. NvH was convicted of hiring thugs to kill a business rival and his family.

Oh no he wasn't. He was acquitted. In any event, who is this "... and his family"?. BScar23625 16:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Is van Hoogstraten Jewish? --41.14.89.105 (talk) 09:26, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

He says that he isn't in this 2006 interview with The Guardian. However, the context is strange: the interviewer "asked whether he had Jewish blood, but he said forcefully, 'No, definitely not - no Jewish, no Irish.'" One could deduce all kinds of things from this but that would be original research. —Cliftonian^{the orangey bit} 15:22, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

(This was in Britain -- he has interests in several countries.) The judge believed that the intent was to kill, not merely to frighten. People reading his character references should have this information.

On a technical Wiki-note, I apologise for reverting before discussing here, but I am not sure how else to draw BScar23625 and other knowledgeable editors' attention to this. Thank you. BrainyBabe 13:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

BrainyBabe. I hear what you say. But the fact is that van Hoogstraten was acquitted of the murder/manslaughter charges. Who are you to say that the original conviction "was overturned on a technicality"?. That is just opinion. In any event, the crime and acquittal took place in the UK, not Zimbabwe. Perhaps you should make an entry on the Nicholas van Hoogstraten page rather than on this Zimbabwe page?. Take a look at the Gregory Lauder-Frost discussion page if you are interested in this kind of issue. I hesitate to mention the word "defamation". Bob BScar23625 16:33, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

BrainyBabe. As you have not responded, I have revised the text to retain your general point while presenting it in a more subtle manner. I hope that is OK. Bob BScar23625 05:24, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I was not able to log on yesterday. Bob, I appreciate your insertion of the lengthy Observer article as a reference note, which I remember readig when it came out; it contains a lot of NvH's direct quotes and sufficient background from the interviewer.

As for the murder (which was done in front of the victim's grandchildren -- no one else was killed, you are correct): NVH was charged with manslaughter (for hiring the thugs who are serving time for murder), convicted, and the conviction was overturned in the Court of Appeal. Then the victim's family sued in the civil courts (sort of like the O.J. Simpson case), and won a multi-million pound award against NvH. The judge said he considered him guilty not just to a civil level of proof (balance of probabilities) but to criminal one (beyond a reasonable doubt).

The substance of the case was that Raja was suing NvH for around 100k, and two hoods shot/stabbed Raja to death. But Raja lived long enough to utter the words "van Hoogstraten's men have done this" to his son and a police officer. NvH was charged with murder, but the evidence against him was all circumstantial and this became apparent at the trial. The judge said to the jury something along the lines of "if you feel that the evidence is inadequate to convict NvH of murder, then you might convict him of the lesser offence of manslaughter". The jury obliged.

But the judge was wrong. Manslaughter is a different offence to murder - not a lesser offence. If NvH had been charged with manslaughter from the outset, then his defence would have been appropriate to the charge. That was not just a technicality. CPS statement on the case

The civil action for damages was a wholly different matter. BScar23625 13:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

It is also a matter of record (recapped in the article you cite) that he served four years for hiring someone to throw a hand-grenade into a clergyman's house, and that he has been convicted numerous times of other offenses connected with his business endeavours. "it was enough to earn him a four-year sentence, and a further five years for receiving stolen silver which the police found in his house when they went to question him. Since then, there have been convictions for demanding money with menaces, forcible entry, bribing a prison officer, assault, contempt of court..." (How can I do those superscripts to link to the article?)

I am not suggesting this belongs in this article, but I am attempting to show why I think some knowledge of NvH's many criminal convictions is relevant in judging his ability to give a character reference. I would agree to the use of the flexible euphemism 'colorful', which you inserted, in conjunction with 'and criminal'. That's brief and to the point. WOuld that be Ok with you? I would much rather sort this out on the talk page. BrainyBabe 10:54, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

BrainyBabe. Change the word "colourful" to "criminal" if you wish. But think hard about that and be aware of the Gregory Lauder-Frost Wikipedia article. NvH, like David Frost, never sues for libel. But, one never knows when he might change his policy on this. Do you want to receive solicitor's letters and run the risk, however slight, of losing your house?. Bob BScar23625 13:03, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I have added one word to the other so that the phrase now reads "a man with a colourful and criminal history". Thanks for this discussion. BrainyBabe 17:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure. Be aware that NvH gives generously to various charitable and voluntary sector operations in Zimbabwe. Don't believe all you read about him. Bob BScar23625 17:40, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

footnote : The GL-F article has been purged, so references thereto have been struck out. The substance of the case was that the article contained material that was either false or was protected by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. BScar23625 21:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Copyright

This article uses a number of unfree images for which it claims fair use, and while the majority of these claims seem to be well-grounded, I believe that Image:ZBWE1.jpg may not qualify. This photograph of a mother and child is used to illustrate generic white Zimbabweans, and while it is true that its use here is unlikely to cause the copyright holder(s) to lose much money, it would not be difficult to replace it with a free photo. After all, there are lots of white Zimbabweans, and pretty much any old shot will do. On the other hand, the other photos in this article would be much harder to replace; it's a lot harder to get a free shot of a famous white Zimbabwean, and the photo from the government brochure is still harder to replace. I've removed the image, and have posted a message at User:Etienne.navarro's talk page, as he's the only wikipedian listed as being from Zimbabwe -- perhaps he knows some white Zimbabweans. --Zantastik talk 17:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Zantastik. I agree that Image:ZBWE1.jpg is borderline, but I am sure that a case could be made for its use. The case is complicated by the fact that the image's author (the famous photojournalist Mary Ellen Mark) has specifically refused permission for its use in this context. I will see what I can come up with in its place. Bob BScar23625 15:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

ps Replacement inserted. As you say, "any old shot will do". Bob BScar23625 15:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Failed GA

As a non-specialist reader of this subject, the following is my assesment, per WP:WIAGA:

1. It is well written.

(a) compelling prose and comprehensible to non-specialist readers: weak passes

• The story is not compelling for a non-specialist reader. Perhaps because of some unexplained terms and abbreviations in the article that confuses me. Please see below.
• There are many specific Zimbabwean knowledge about politics and others that are not explained briefly.

(b) follows logical structure and good lead section:

• Lead section does not conform WP:LS, that it does not give a context in the first line.
• There is a section Aftermath at the end. What kind of aftermath?

(c) follows the Wikipedia Manual of Style: weak passes

• Regarding style of the reference list (see 2.b below).

(d) technical jargons: needs improvement

• This statement: "It never gained full Dominion status,..." in the lead section, but nowhere in the article explain about Dominion status.
• Some unexplained terms/abbreviations: BSAC, ESAP, and others.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

(a) it provides references: weak passes

• The second paragraph of the lead section contains claims and facts without its source.

(b) inline citations is required: weak passes

• Please read again WP:CITE regarding citation style, as references list is unreadable for me.
• The first line has opinion statement: "The first whites of Zimbabwe are thought ....". Thought by whom? Citation is needed here.

(c) reliable sources: weak passes

• Personal website (ref #6) and mail (ref #18) cannot be used as reliable source.

(d) no original research: passes

3. It is broad in its coverage.

(a) all major aspects: failed

• I miss the story about relationship with other races, esp. african Zimbabwean.
• There was a big headline news months ago about eviction of white Zimbabwean farmer and controversial plan from Mugabe to evict whites from Zimbabwe. Where is it in the article?
• Due to that events, it must be a some historical background about this bad relationship, but I miss that in the article.

(b) stays focus & no non-notable trivia: passes

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

(a) viewpoints are represented fairly and without bias: failed

• Controversies about whites in Zimbabwe from other races that lead to white farmer eviction is missing here.
• It is clearly visible that this article has a bias view, written only from white Zimbabwean perspective.

(b) all significant points of view are fairly presented: failed

• This is related with 3.a. Views from other races about whites in Zimbabwe are not presented in this article.

5. It is stable (no edit wars ongoing): passes

6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.

(a) proper tags and descriptive captions: failed

• This is a major problem in this article, because almost all images are copyrighted and not properly tagged.
• Copyrighted images without fair use rationale: Image:Wright07s.jpg, Image:ZBWE2.jpg, Image:Bennett300.jpg and Image:Trudy.jpg
• Copyrighted images with not-enough rationale to be used in Wikipedia: Image:Chelsy2.JPG, Image:BillyR.jpg and Image:Bredenkamp.JPG. The reasons are that all of those images are pictures of living person that can be replaced easily to illustrate the subject, i.e. white Zimbabwean. Per WP:FAIR:

Wikipedia permits the 'fair use' of content only under very restricted circumstances where the image or content not only meets the legal tests for fair use but is also, in essence, not repeatable. ie. it would not be possible to replace the image or content with an equivalent free image. This might, for example, include an historical event, but a publicity still of a vehicle, building or living person can be replaced comparatively easily.

(b) a lack of images: passes

Due to the above matters, hence I failed this article for GA. When those are solved, this article can be renominated again. — Indon (reply) — 16:28, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Indon. Thankyou for your time and attention, which are appreciated. I will take another look at the article. Believe me, President Mugabe ("Mad Bob") has never threatened to evict whites (or anyone else) from Zimbabwe. Bob BScar23625 16:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Renomination for GA status

I feel that the earlier objections have been reasonably addressed, and have now renominated the article as a GA candidate. Bob BScar23625 15:56, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Lots of dubious statements

There are lots of dubious statements in this article. One of the most prominent on a quick read is "White Zimbabweans have brought a pioneering spirit to the nation and have contributed to economic life at several levels" - there are two sources quoted for this statement, but they don't appear to justify presenting it as objective fact. Can someone justify, perhaps whoever inserted it if they are around? Generally the article very clearly is saying, explicity and subliminally, to the reader: "whites made this country and continue to do so". I don't like it because it isn't verifiable fact (I will stay away from going further...) --SandyDancer 19:36, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

SandyDancer. It was me that wrote the statement you refer to. If you examine the two references carefully, I think you will read a subliminal message which is the exact opposite of the one you suggest. Perhaps that message is conveyed in a manner which is a little too subtle?. Do you feel that the two references convey a positive or negative message about the business activities of certain whites in Zimbabwe?. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 21:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Clever and subtle language doesn't seem appropriate, especially when dealing with a controversial topic like this. You didn't answer my question about how those sources possibly justify placing the statement in the article as if it is objective fact. On that basis, I think it should be deleted - or at least rewritten. --SandyDancer 22:02, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

SandyDancer. Well, the term "pioneering spirit" can be interpreted in several ways. I use the term in the context of the criminal looting of a sovereign nation (the DRC) by ruthless businessmen. Are you claiming that this looting never took place?. Bob BScar23625 22:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

If I'm honest I've got no idea whether or not the looting took place. I'd hazard a guess it did, if that helps. However my point is that this isn't clear from what is written at all, and the "pioneering spirit" bit is more likely to be interpreted another way. Perhaps you could consider rewriting it? I'd prefer not to plunge in and do so because I am ignorant of the topic and you are not. --SandyDancer 23:01, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

SandyDancer. Go to the heading "Context on Nicholas van Hoogstraten" above and you will see that I had a very similar discussion with BrainyBabe concerning NvH. I described NvH as "colourful" and inserted a link to an article outlining his history. BrainyBabe insisted on describing him as "criminal", which I considered to be potentially defamatory. We compromised in the end by describing him as "colourful and criminal". If you don't like "pioneering" then perhaps you might suggest an alternative term to describe the business activities of the individuals concerned?. Bob

Do you really think its good to refer to people as "pioneering" when you mean "exploitative"? I just fail to see why such tongue in cheek euphemism is appropriate. Fine, don't defame people - but within the limits what is lawful, state the verified facts. --SandyDancer 10:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I think SandyDancer has a valid point here. Why not use "exploitative" ? Wizzy…☎ 15:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, Andy. I didn't see your comment immediately. Bob BScar23625 16:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

SandyDancer. I am always very careful about publicly accusing anybody of doing anything improper. As an aside, go to Reference number 17 and you will get an account of why Billy Rautenbach returned to his native Zimbabwe. The Rautenbachs are real characters, with Billy's son Conrad being the Zimbabwe national champion rally driver. How about we take out "pioneering spirit" and insert "buccaneering business skills"?. Bob BScar23625 11:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Again, jokey euphemism doesn't seem appropriate. If something is, in your view, defamatory, best not to imply it all, as that would still be defamatory. --SandyDancer 11:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

SandyDancer. The Zimnews website is professionally run and its report on Billy's history looks very carefully worded. Putting a link to it could never be defamatory, although I would never publicly state the innuendo contained therein. The same considerations apply to comment on the DRC involvement and the evasion of EU sanctions. The use of euphemisms is standard practice in journalism. Why do you feel that those euphemisms are "jokey"?. Bob BScar23625 12:01, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I don't think euphemisms are "jokey" per se - but I think they are being used in that way here. And whether or not such euphemism might be standard practice in journalism, the writing style of an encyclopedia should often be very different. --SandyDancer 12:06, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

SandyDancer. Do you feel that it is jokey to describe Nicholas van Hoogstraten as "colourful" rather than "criminal"?. Bob BScar23625 12:17, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I think it is inappropriate for an encyclopedia, and opaque for those picking up the article for the first time - it obscures true meaning. --SandyDancer 12:20, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

SandyDancer. What is inappropriate for an encyclopedia?. We seem to be drifting into a discussion of what Wikipedia is about. Do you feel that you have insights into Wikipedia that others lack?. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 14:53, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

I think you are missing the point entirely. The point I am making. By your own admission here the wording is "subtle". To my mind, the guff about "pioneering spirit", which isn't actually backed up by the sources, is quite simply misleading. It isn't factual. The fact that you elude to all sorts of things it really means doesn't help the casual reader. --SandyDancer 15:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

SandyDancer. I accept that use of the term "pioneering spirit" is ambiguous - and intentionally so. I think that by now we both agree the point that is being made, so can you suggest an alternative term?. You offered the term "exploitative", but that can mean anything or nothing. regards. Bob BScar23625 15:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

SandyDancer. Well, how about we take out "White Zimbabweans have brought a pioneering spirit to the nation and have contributed to economic life at several levels" and insert "The political environment in Zimbabwe has allowed the development of an exploitative business culture, in which white businessmen have played a prominent role."?. Bob BScar23625 16:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Thanks --SandyDancer 16:48, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Done. That was an interesting discussion. Bob BScar23625 17:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

GA nomination on Hold

Hi,

This article has a good start on its references and has pretty comprehensive coverage of the topic. I put many {{fact}} tags on it. Please note that I did not put them everywhere that they are needed; I just put them in places that would give you an idea where they belong:

• In general, any time you mention a specific number (2 million this; 15% that) it should be cited (except perhaps in the lead; and then it can be skipped there only if the fact is repeated and cited later).
• Any time you make a statement that "the government did this; a famous person said that" you need a cite.
• Any time you make a strong generalization (most people believe this; most people do that) you need a cite.

I didn't scan closely for POV problems. Beware of anything that just sounds like you are trying to persuade readers that any particular group is good or bad -- loaded words like "freedom fighter," "oppressor" etc. I'm not saying I saw those words; just giving examples.

I'm putting this article's GA nom on Hold for 7 days. Drop me a line if you have q's.--Ling.Nut 11:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Follow up comments: Also remember, GA is not FA. Everything I said above is true. However, the standards for GA do not require nearly the same degree of completion of various goals as an FA would. GA is more subjective. I personally look for a flexible "something like 75% or 80%" of the places where citations should be to actually have citations.

Feel free to ask if you have questions.--Ling.Nut 01:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I sincerely appreciate all the hard work and good work that is being put into this article. It is a pleasure to see committed editors. :-)

--Ling.Nut 19:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Ling.Nut. Take another look at it now. I have used the Angus Selby PhD thesis (Selby) widely as a reference source. I think that is fair, given that the thesis has been heavily assessed and is itself tightly referenced. The thesis is internet accessible, and anyone who wishes can work back to primary sources. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 09:48, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Final concern is the last thing mentioned, see below.

I made one nontrivial edit out of NPOV concerns. You can revert my edit if you wish, but I think the sentence regarding the return of a passport to a significant living person should assume a more neutral posture. Please see the edit summary. Moreover, I tried to follow the link referenced at that section, but it requires a subscription. If you could find a different link or reference, that would be more appropriate.

As it stands at this moment, most reviewers would suggest that the article is well-written enough and well-referenced enough for GA. The biggest concern in any controversial area is WP:NPOV. I noted what appear to be good faith attempts to maintain WP:NPOV, including:

• "blacks being excluded from land that they had worked for generations"
• "100,000 blacks were forcibly resettled from farming land designated for white ownership"
• "between black men and white women illegal – with a penalty of two years imprisonment for any offending white woman"
• "Public spending on education, healthcare and other social services was heavily weighted towards provision for whites. Most of the better paid jobs in public service were reserved for whites."

I'm sure you're aware that if you decide to go for Featured Article, their reviewers will probably be going over every line with a fine-toothed comb looking for NPOV issues. But as everyone likes to say, GA is not FA, and I think the examples above show good faith.

Also please be aware that there are still many unreferenced facts remaining that would definitely need to be addressed if you intend to go for FA. But GA is not....

• However, I still have one final concern that I should have mentioned earlier. I apologize for not catching it from the beginning, but it is only a matter of a good 30 or 45 minutes' work, I suspect. Please read WP:LEAD. The lead (first few paragraphs) should be a one-stop, bird's eye view of the entire article (as is stated more clearly in WP:LEAD). Please rewrite the lead along those lines. When the lead looks good, I will pass this article.

Thanks! --Ling.Nut 14:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• PS — I'm not gonna ask you to reference anything else in the body of the article. But as you rewrite the lead, you may occasionally wanna stick to presenting summarizations (this is not a rule, it's a sugggestion), and put (well-referenced) details in an appropriate place in the body. On the other hand, it is also sometimes good to have some (well-referenced) details in the lead, though. I'm speaking vaguely because it's all a judgment call; use your best judgment. If a detail is significant enough to stay in the lead, leave it there, but please reference it. If a summary will do, then summarize, and move the details to the body. Again, use your best judgment. But please reference details that you leave in the lead. Many thanks! --Ling.Nut 15:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

OK now?. Bob BScar23625 23:21, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

• This is an excellent job so far, but you shortened the lead a little too much. :-)
• Look up and down the article for major topics left ummentioned in the lead. I can say for sure that — in my opinion — you need to mention "white farms," mention the land issue (both the fact that blacks were forcibly resettled in one period, then whites lost their land in another), mention the periods of political & economic & instability & violence. That's my list of what else should be in the lead; you may disagree. There may be other major issues that I missed, too. As I said, just look for key points in the article -- not neglecting controversies -- and put them in.
• You are about 3 or at most 5 minutes from being passed as GA.
• Oh wait, please also reference that statement about population. So only 1 more sentence needs referencing.
• Thanks --Ling.Nut 00:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Ling.Nut. Thankyou for your guidance, which is appreciated. I have updated the article in line with your latest comments, but conservatively so. Perhaps we have done enough for now?. We can return to the article if there is any question of an FA nomination. Bob BScar23625 12:29, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Good Article nomination Passed

Good work! I appreciate the hard work put into this article. I hope you have success if you eventually go for Featured Article.

• --Ling.Nut 13:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Ling.Nut. Thankyou for your time and attention. Bob BScar23625 16:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Poor Whites reported by Mopane Tree

Link is already disabled but article remains online

ZIMBABWE: Poor whites hit hard times IWPR - Published by SysOp - 01-16-2007 Jim Rose, who was struck and killed a few weeks ago by a motorist while riding on his bicycle to Harare from his home in Chitungwiza 30 kilometres away, was considered rather odd by the standards of modern Zimbabwe.

A white man who said he was born in New York, he was a retired civil engineer who fifteen years ago married Mavis, a black woman. Their family home is in a working-class residential area called Unit L in Chitungwiza.

His frail looks belied an inner strength that enabled him to cycle an average 60 kilometres daily from Chitungwiza to Harare, and back, and also to get used to living in a poor neighbourhood often characterised by flowing raw sewage. The people of Chitungwiza grew to embrace him as their own and nicknamed him “Murewa”, an affectionate moniker given without prejudice to white people who are comfortable living among blacks.

“Rhodies” - as whites who long for the old pre-Zimbabwe days of white-ruled Rhodesia are known - called such white people “niggerboeties” [nigger lovers] and despised them.

Jim was seen putting on the same colour of clothing every day. His widow Mavis told IWPR her husband’s wardrobe had more than ten sets of identical clothes. “He just felt that those were the type of clothes suited to him and his community,” she said.

Jim was part of a new group of people in President Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe informally classified as “poor whites”.

A University of Zimbabwe sociologist, who preferred not to be named, told IWPR, “In Rhodesia whites generally were a privileged class. It was impossible to see a poor white person because of a philosophy of ‘esprit de corps’. If one white man hit hard times the others would come to the rescue. They had an elaborate set of homes for all sorts of people where the poor ones were either hidden or rehabilitated.

“Since independence this system has broken down, firstly because the new order saw it as discriminatory but, secondly, because the rich whites became fewer and fewer as they either emigrated or saw their fortunes wane as the Zimbabwean economy began to falter in the 1990s.”

The number of poor whites began to increase at the turn of the millennium, mainly with the advent of Mugabe’s land reform programme, in which vast swathes of commercial agricultural land were confiscated from white farmers.

“Most of the poor whites we are seeing on the streets of Harare used to live on farms where they were employed, [largely] to supervise black labour,” said the sociologist. “Most of them are of limited education and therefore cannot stand on their own. So when the white commercial farmers who supported them were chucked off the farms these white guys found themselves destitute.”

Indications are that there are more poor whites than are generally evident on the streets. “Most of them are fiercely proud and would rather remain destitute in their homes than be seen on the streets,” continued the sociologist. But at a shopping centre in Eastlea, just outside Harare’s central business district, the evidence is stark. Five destitute white men, aged between thirty and sixty, have thrown pride and caution to the wind and beg openly. They marshal cars into parking bays and offer to clean and guard them while the owners do their shopping. The shoppers are mostly well-to-do black people and the poor whites do not seem to mind begging from blacks.

One shopper told IWPR how an elderly white woman approached him asking for money. “She said her husband, a pensioner, had a serious back pain which needed urgent medication but they could not afford it on his pension,” according to the shopper, who said he was unable to guess whether this was a genuine case of need or whether the woman was trying to con him. He however gave her some money and she moved on to another customer to beg more money. “She looked like somebody with an alcohol problem and I feared the money I gave was not for her husband’s medication,” said the man.

Zimbabwean pensioners of all races are the hardest hit by the seven-year-long economic recession. Their lives’ work has been eaten away by the country’s astronomical inflation, which in the early days of 2007 reached a record level of 1,281 per cent, by far the highest in the world. Most pensioners live on less than 10,000 Zimbabwe dollars a month [4 US dollars at the almost universally-used black market rate, which reflects realistically the true value of Zimbabwe’s currency] - enough to buy only ten loaves of bread. For all intents and purposes, pensioners are living at the extreme ranges of penury.

But do poor whites form a special class that needs special attention?

“It’s a question that demands a lot of sober thought,” said a veteran black journalist in Harare, who asked not to be named. “I think the answer is ‘yes’, but then there are a lot of other poor people who need attention. In Arcadia, for example, the Coloured (mixed race) community is falling apart because of grinding poverty. You should see how the whole community is being destroyed by cheap alcohol which has become their only refuge from poverty.”

Arcadia is a district in southern Harare that was designated the district for Coloured people to live during the era of white rule. It has remained a traditional Coloured suburb. The community was considered a buffer between supremacist whites and the black majority, to the extent that they enjoyed more privileges than their black mothers, cousins, aunts and uncles - but fewer opportunities than their white forebears.

“Every civilised country should have a sort of safety net for its poor, regardless of who they are,” the Harare journalist told IWPR. “But Robert Mugabe has created a strong anti-white sentiment that is loudly-hailed everyday in the public media to the point where, in the end, it seems the only poor people are black.”

He said that non-governmental organisations also tended to pander to the myth, continuing, “They think food aid should only be for blacks in rural areas or underprivileged black communities in working class suburbs. But we have a huge crisis in predominantly Coloured areas and areas formerly preserves of the white population.”

He argued that in Zimbabwe’s current dire situation black people were generally less vulnerable and were marginally better off than their white and Coloured fellow countrymen. “First,” he said, “most blacks have two homes, one in the urban areas and the other in the rural areas. The two supplement each other. Hence when hard times hit they can send some family members back home to the countryside, and if hard times hit the rural areas those in the cities will always chip in with various forms of help.”

He said the African extended family system remained invaluable for the black population, even in Zimbabwe’s unusually disastrous context - unlike the situation in the more individualistic white and Coloured communities. Jim Rose, the white American, must have found the extended family a comfort and solace throughout the years he lived in the black community of Chitungwiza.

The journalist added, “I think non-government organisations should begin focusing on the poor whites and Coloureds. Otherwise if we allow these two groups to perish from hunger and poverty, what would be the difference between that and ethnic cleansing?”

Benedict Unendoro is the pseudonym of an IWPR contributor in Zimbabwe.

Oprahtopics. Your additions to the article are taken almost verbatim from the above - which is a published source. The Wikipedia community tends to frown on this sort of thing. Perhaps you might take another look at your recent contributions?. As an aside, I have repaired the link to your source website. best wishes. Bob BScar23625 15:49, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

What merits?

Question about this line:

Whatever the merits of this situation, as time passed it became increasingly unwelcome to the majority ethnic groups within Zimbabwe and also to wide sections of international opinion.

What "merits" to what was essentially apartheid? If no merits, then why is the introductory clause necessary? Is it surprising that it "became increasingly unwelcome" to other ethnic groups to be systematically discriminated against? This seems to me like a thinly veiled opinion that the old system of racial discrimination was better. In no way is this comment by me an endorsement of the current political regime, but I feel the above-quoted statement is biased and should be rewritten.J P M7791 (talk) 17:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Review: On Hold

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "Culture and Society" articles. I believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. However, in reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that need to be addressed. I have made minor corrections and have included several points below that need to be addressed for the article to remain a GA. Please address them within seven days and the article will maintain its GA status. If progress is being made and issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted. If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you disagree with any of the issues, leave a comment after the specific issue and I'll be happy to discuss/agree with you. To keep tabs on your progress so far, either strike through the completed tasks or put checks next to them.

Needs inline citations:

1. "Also, the white farming community never amounted to more than around 8% of the total white population and this proportion fell steadily after 1945 up to independence in 1980."

   see Selby thesis - figure 1.6, page 63. As a part of the total white population the proportion of commercial farmers peaked at 8% in 1920 then gradually fell back to 3% in 1980. It then rose again to 7% in 2000 before falling back to 2% today. Bob BScar23625 (talk) 16:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

2. "Many of the new immigrants had a "not here" attitude to majority rule and independence."

   see Selby thesis - s1.4.1 'Farmers and the right wing backlash', page 59 BScar23625 (talk) 17:04, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

3. "The land confiscated from white owners has been redistributed to black peasant farmers and smallholders, acquired by commercial land companies, or individuals connected to the regime."

   see Selby thesis - s6.4.3 'Who's still farming', p 321 and s6.4.4 'Who's getting what land', p327 BScar23625 (talk) 14:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

4. "Sympathisers of the expropriated white farmers have claimed that lack of professional management skills among the new landholders has resulted in a dramatic decline in Zimbabwe agricultural production."

   see Selby thesis - s6.4 'Assessing the fast track land redistributions', p314, notably Figure 6.2, p316. Note : Dr Selby may not like being described as a "sympathiser" of the white farmers, but he is a regular visitor to this site and will correct anything he considers to be a misrepresentation of his position BScar23625 (talk) 16:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

5. "In tennis, the Black family of Cara, Byron and Wayne Black are all ranked among the top doubles players in the world. "
6. "Even his critics accept that Stamps was motivated by a desire to improve the lot of poorer people."
7. "Three out of four of the MDC's elected top executives in 2000 were white."
8. "Bennett was excluded from Parliament and imprisoned after he assaulted Attorney General Patrick Chinamasa on the floor of the House after Chinamasa said his "forefathers were thieves and murderers"."

Other issues:

1. "The country gained its independence as Zimbabwe in April 1980, under a ZANU-PF government lead by Robert Mugabe." Single sentences shouldn't stand alone, either expand on it or incorporate it into another paragraph. Fix the other occurrences within the article.
2. "Bredenkamp was able to continue and expand his business after independence, making himself a personal fortune estimated at around US$1,000m" Is $1,000m supposed to be a billion? If so, reword.
3. Image:Vermeulencourt.jpeg needs a fair use rationale specifically for this article.

This article covers the topic well and if the above issues are addressed, I believe the article can remain a GA. I will leave the article on hold for seven days, but if progress is being made and an extension is needed, one may be given. I will leave messages on the talk pages of the main contributors to the article along with the related WikiProjects so that the workload can be shared. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 06:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I struck through the one completed issue so far. I will leave the article on hold for another week so the rest of the issues can be addressed. Let me know if you have any questions. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 05:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Nehrams2020. Leave it with me. Most of your listed statements are taken from the Selby thesis - an Oxford University Ph.D thesis which is itself very rigorously moderated and referenced. We have at least 40 references to that thesis already and I wonder if we need any more?. As an aside, the photo-montage that has been added at the head of the article looks great. But I am not convinced that the people pictured can accurately be described as "whites in Zimbabwe", They look more like whites with Zimbabwean connections, which is not the same thing. BobBScar23625 (talk) 09:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I have some concerns about the people in the box as well, the athletes are fine. I mean Warren Carne and Cara Black were both born in Zimbabwe and represent Zimbabwe in their sports. Although Price was born in SA, he was brought up in Zimbabwe and is a Zimbabwean citizen that represented Zim. But it is really Doris Lessing that has been an issue. She was not born in Zimbabwe, yet was brought up there and lived there for a while. But some sources list her as a white Zimbabwean and some refer to her as 'British'. see http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/List_of_White_Africans . Without her presence, I felt that the athletes were too dominant so I have left her be. I'm also wondering whether Warren Carne is relevant enough? Ideally, I think Chelsy Davy would be a suitable choice considering her high-profile media status. However there does not seem to be a free image around. Perhaps Chelsy should replace Doris if an image can be found?

As a suggestion, speaking of Lessing, perhaps a new section for culture/Arts should be created? Teatreez (talk) 12:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I see that progress is being made in improving the articles, but if addressing the issues on this page, please be sure to strike through the issues so I can get an update on your progress. If the issues can't be addressed, please contact me on my talk page and I'll delist it for now. Otherwise, I'll re-review the article again in a week. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 02:40, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Review: Pass

I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have removed the unsourced statements from the article, which can be readded once sources are found. The list of these statements are the ones in the above "needs inline citations" section. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. It would also be beneficial to go through the article and update all of the access dates of the online inline citations and fix any dead links. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 06:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

May need a few other book sources, full selby citation and more on internal white divisions

I beleive the article meets GA criteria, and was pleasantly surprised by its candid tone. Many overseas white Rhodesians I have met prior to the mid 90s paint a picture of unrelieved gloom, doom and nostalgia. For some, this might very well be true, and the late 1990s and beyond could well illustrate the theme, but the candid information presented showing remaining, indeed increasing prosperity for many whites in some instances prior to that, adds much needed corrective balance. At the same time the article refuses to engage in all too easy white-bashing. It fully acknowledges the historical injustices of the land issue but the quote: "White farmers would respond to claims that they owned "70% of the best arable land" by stating that what they actually owned was "70% of the best developed arable land" — and the two are entirely different things.[37]" shows the economic facts on the other side of the coin. This candid approach serves the article well, and strengthens its sense of balance. The case of white farmer Henry Meade who publicly opposed the eviction of his black neighbor is also worth documenting. Other comments if an FA upgrade is contemplated:

1. Perhaps a few more books might be added to sources. The Selby thesis, and newspaper articles are relied on heavily, but are there no credible books also on the subject? Perhaps a few should be listed in a "Sources" type section. Still, the Selby thesis is available online for review by anyone, adding to the article's credibility.
2. I think though that there should be at least one full citation for the thesis: dates, university, author, etc rather than just "Selby Thesis" to begin the reference list. One cannot tell what it is without opening up the online PDF.
3. Having looked at said thesis, it notes that the whites were not a monolithic bloc, but showed important social divisions, such as the Boer-derived population. No doubt such a population brought a number of racial, political, social and other attitudes with them. Some mention at least should be made of such variations among the whites.

All in all, a fair bill on the topic. Majubahill (talk) 17:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Good points, especiall wrt to social divisions among different white groups. There is reference to this in Doris Lessing's The Grass Is Singing, how Poor Whites are always Afrikaners and never British. This is further demonstrated in the books Mukiwa and When A Crocodile Eats The Sun by Peter Godwin who also makes reference to the lower social status of Portugese and Greek whites. That said, this needs to be said without exagerration.

I can't find a link, but there is some sort of saying that was used in Rhodesia-

When the Jews leave - take note. When the Greeks leave - get worried. When the Portuguese leave - pack like hell and get your ass to the airport! Teatreez (talk) 15:11, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Coltart1.jpg

Guys. I am being assailed by the image police on this one. The owner of the image (Senator David Coltart) has given specific permission for the image to be used. Even so, I am confronted with threats. Perhaps some of you would care to chip in on this?. See the image Discussion page. I realise that I may be coming close to a breach of the canvassing rule here, but I feel the situation justifies it. Bob BScar23625 (talk) 13:08, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Italian culture in New Zealand

I've removed this as of tangental relevance to the subject of the article:

The director of New Zealand's Cathay Pacific Italian Film Festival is White Zimbabwean Tony Lambert, who left Rhodesia at 17 during the Rhodesian Bush War. The Italian Film Festival is held across the world. It presents the most contemporary films of Italian cinema and these are decided upon by the Italian embassy, festival organisers and sponsors. In New Zealand it is both the largest single cultural film event as well as the most significant Italian cultural event.

Well sourced, but this article isn't for a compendium of everything done by people who have left the country. BrainyBabe (talk) 12:01, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Citations

Please note, this is not a review, but it may help with future review processes.

The internet inline citations used in this article are improperly formatted. Internet citations require at the very least information on the title, publisher and last access date of any webpages used. If the source is a news article then the date of publication and the author are also important. This information is useful because it allows a reader to a) rapidly identify a source's origin b) ascertain the reliability of that source and c) find other copies of the source should the website that hosts it become unavaliable for any reason. It may also in some circumstances aid in determining the existance or status of potential copyright infringments. Finally, it looks much tidier, making the article appear more professional. There are various ways in which this information can be represented in the citation, listed at length at Wikipedia:Citing sources. The simplest way of doing this is in the following format:

<ref>{{cite web|(insert URL)|title=|publisher=|work=|date=|author=|accessdate=}}</ref>

As an example:

• <ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.discovery.org/a/3859|title=Avoiding a Thirty Years War|publisher=www.discovery.org|work=[[The Washington Post]]|date=2006-12-21|author=Richard W. Rahn|accessdate=2008-05-25}}</ref>

which looks like:

• Richard W. Rahn (2006-12-21). "Avoiding a Thirty Years War". The Washington Post. www.discovery.org. Retrieved 2008-05-25.

If any information is unknown then simply omit it, but title, publisher and last access dates are always required. I strongly recommend that all internet inline references in this article be formatted properly as soon as possible. If you have any further questions please contact me and as mentioned above, more information on this issue can be found at Wikipedia:Citing sources. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 16:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Economic decline and white emigration?

The article first states that whites are extremely influential in the Zimbabwean economy. And then, the article goes on to say that there is "debate" about whether there is a link between white emigration and Zimbabwean economic decline.

The article contradicts itself for "political correctness purposes". I am taking that statement out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.133.205.143 (talk) 19:48, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Extremely biased, revisionist wiki (or two wrongs don't make a right)

I came upon this wiki in an attempt to find out how many Rhodesians (of European descent and otherwise) have been killed and/or became refugees since the former Rhodesia was turned, through military violence, and International economic coersion, into the present black African administered State known as Zimbabwe. Instead of finding any data relavent to my inquiry I came upon this wiki. A wiki inordinately packed with a historically revisionist "framing" of content, and a distinct bias towards black Africans of Bantu (West African descent) at the "expense" of white Africans of European descent. Some examples of historical revisionist framing are as follows: paragraph 2 "in most European colonies in Africa and Asia, white immigrants tool a privileged postition in many areas of society. I postulate this is a revisionist and biased view point due to the fact it discounts the reality that the society some white immigrants had privilieged positions in was in fact an immigrant society, one which they brought with them to Africa from Europe. Furthermore, this society itself contained a distinct class stratification within it. A stratification in which black Africans tended to find themselves on the "lower rungs" so to speak when the same black Africans attemted to engage and join this newly introduced social system (society). In no way shape or form is it presented in the wiki, other than the original military victories of the British South Africa Company over local black African immigrants from West Africa, either how or why other black Africans choose to engage this European imported social system or why they choose to live within it, since they had their own social systems, with their own class structures and rules in which to engage and live in (perhaps the grass was greener, so to speak?). Terrimechanist (talk) 02:40, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! --Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 09:57, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

You think a statement that whites held a "privileged postition" [sic] in colonial society is revisionist!? Or even more laughably, biased? Is the earth flat too? Can I perhaps point you in the direction of the Zimbabwe article, and you can start to read up on land dispossession and how these underprivileged colonists managed to get control of almost all the land. Greenman (talk) 13:03, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

But this isn't about colonial society; Zimbabwe hasn't been a colony for a long time, yet violence and discrimination against whites persist. I agree with Terrimechanist's appraisal, and that's part of why I put this article up for GAR, eventually delisting it because nothing was done. Tezero (talk) 19:37, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Current information in the lead

I think the lead needs to start with some current information... Perhaps the info on numbers of whites in Zimbabwe and a bit more about their current status. It can then go on to give a summary of the history as it currently does. Yaris678 (talk) 21:45, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Farm murders / attacks

I strongly believe this article needs a paragraph about the farm murders during re-posession. there's plenty references available and pictures. Anyone interested?

--TaraWelles (talk) 09:16, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Or the fact that the willing seller/willing buyer policy funded by Uk was abandoned in favour of invasion with get out "in an hour" or be be burnt out. Some mention must be made of the number of former white owned farms that are now "owned" by the regime

grace mugabe - wie of president

Senate president has multiple farms --Abz zeus (talk) 22:11, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

'Rhodesian' as synonym for 'white Rhodesian'

I know nothing about this topic, but this use seems to follow the whole 'invisibility' of blacks in colonial countries, and to be racist. It is mentioned as a synonym in the lead sentence. Is this a neutral word, or should we qualify it as being perceived as racist? I'm not interested in debating the fact or the history - rather in IDing references that would support that this is or is not considered a neutral usage. If it is not neutral, then it should be qualified on first use. LaTeeDa (talk) 15:17, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I guess it all comes down to what you want to call yourself. People here who immigrated even in the 80s call themselves Rhodesian, I guess the black community are welcome to call themselves Rhodesian, but I guess they just prefer not to? :) -- User:Bezuidenhout

Bezuidenhout is more or less correct. It ultimately comes down to what the individual person chooses to call himself. See pp. 13–14 here: "Almost all the people who buy [Rhodesian memorabilia] from me have some connection with Rhodesia; most of them still describe themselves as Rhodesians, although they might live in London, Connecticut or Sweden".

Even before 1980, black Rhodesians were not usually referred to simply as "Rhodesians", instead being primarily defined internally by which of the country's many peoples they came from (Mashona, Matabele, Manyika, Karanga, etc). In the overseas press they were almost always collectively referred to with terms such as "Rhodesian Africans" to make clear the distinction between them and their white (or "European") compatriots, who were generally simply called "Rhodesian", or, in the more left-wing press, "the Rhodesian whites" or "settlers".

The use of the term "Rhodesian" to mean a white ex-Rhodesian is somewhat different in the post-1980 context. While there are some exiled "black Rhodesians" (former Selous Scouts spring to mind), it is generally presumed in the modern context that a person described in the present tense as a "Rhodesian", particularly when a Zimbabwean or ex-Zimbabwean is speaking, will be white. A journal that may or may not be relevant to this is Rhodesians Worldwide, which has been published since 1984 and, to the best of my knowledge, has an overwhelmingly white readership. In the Zimbabwean press, which is largely government-controlled, references to "Rhodesians" are always to whites, and are generally intended as derogatory. —Cliftonian (talk) 15:58, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

The latter point - that in the Zimbabwe press whites are often referred to as Rhodesians is probably the strongest argument, and makes sense to me. In this article, 'white Rhodesian' is always used, not just 'Rhodesian', which also makes sense to me in this context. Might want to explain these points a little clearer in the article, because from the outside this looked odd.

While we're on this topic, what do you think of this sentence from the Rhodesia article. It's been there since 2007. "After independence in April 1980, the history of Rhodesians became that of the whites in Zimbabwe." -LaTeeDa (talk) 00:55, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

I think that last point is certainly not accurate, and should be removed. —Cliftonian (talk) 00:59, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Given it's been there for five years, I'll put a NPOV tag on it, and if there isn't an objection, remove it in a couple of days. LaTeeDa (talk) 01:29, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Okay, good stuff. —Cliftonian (talk) 10:15, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Rename main article to Rhodesian people

The article's title is paradoxical. White people in what is now Zimbabwe or those who trace their roots to such identify themselves as Rhodesians. The Mugabe regime does not accept white people as fellow Zimababweans. They have been stripped of basic human rights in an savage form of ethnic cleansing. Redirect the original title to the new title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.163.6 (talk) 08:52, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I concur. If the current article were fairly named then why isn't there a corresponding Black people in America article? Because it would be considered racist. Do I detect a WP double standard? OldCowpoke (talk) 14:37, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

We'd need to achieve some kind of measurable consensus before moving the page. I don't think it's racist though, as terms like these were bandied about the entire time I lived there. To people who never lived there, the racial power politics might seem quite strange, but we think so of the Southern United States as well. To compare the two contexts linguistically seems inappropriate; they are totally and completely different, so they wouldn't use the same vocabulary, for example, to describe the same thing, and I don't mean speaking different languages. Anyway, to reiterate, we need consensus to move the page name from "White people in Zimbabwe" to "Rhodesians". I vote Yes. Icarus of old (talk) 15:02, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

As somebody who knows a fair number of ex-pat Rhodesians, and who lived in Zimbabwe (as it is now) as recent as 2010, my experience of the situation is that most older whites, both those who have left the country and those who have stayed, still tend to think of themselves as "Rhodesian", and often describe themselves as such—but of the whites who stayed, there are a not insignificant number who now consider themselves Zimbabwean. Most younger whites I know are not well versed in the history, and describe their home simply as "Zim"—though the males do tend to show great curiosity and pride when presented with pieces of Rhodesiana, particularly military items.

It must be remembered also that there were before 1980 blacks in the country who considered themselves integrated with white society, and who described themselves as Rhodesian. I'm thinking particularly of black soldiers—many of these were very proud indeed of the country, and some (particularly ex-Selous Scouts) were forced to leave after Mugabe took over.

I think that renaming the article simply to "Rhodesians" would be misleading because I do not believe that this has ever been the correct way to refer exclusively to the white community in the country. When used before 1980, it generally referred to the non-tribal population only, true; but the cities and farms included some Westernised blacks, and what about the Coloured and Indian communities—weren't they Rhodesians too?

Just a few years ago I witnessed an elderly gentleman of Indian descent, standing in a Zimbabwean government office and refusing to give his birthplace on a form as "Harare, Zimbabwe". "I was born in Rhodesia!" he vehemently insisted; "Salisbury!"

Ironically enough, a prominent use of "Rhodesians" to refer only to whites is by the Zimbabwean state media, which in articles critical of certain white people in the country often attempts to prejudice them in the eyes of ZANU-PF supporters by describing them as a "Rhodesian" (a more extreme example is "Selous Scout", which is often used to describe anybody the state wishes to associate with the old Rhodesian Security Forces).

In short, I don't think that renaming this article to "Rhodesians" would truly reflect the facts, and would perhaps even play into the hands of pro-Mugabe extremists by alienating the remaining white population in the country even further. Perhaps a better option might be to rename the article to "White people in Zimbabwe and its antecedents" or similar? —Cliftonian (talk) 16:37, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

This article is about white people in Zimbabwe, not only people who choose to associate themselves with the old regime. The reasons given for change are ridiculous and based on the obviously false assumption that all white people hark back to Rhodesia and therefore identify themselves as such. Greenman (talk) 20:32, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

If the article must be renamed, it should be "White Zimbabweans". I know many whites who immigrated to the UK who refer to themselves as "Rhodesians" (especially parents/grandparents), but referring to it as "Rhodesian people" is misleading as surely "Rhodesians" are people that lives under Rhodesia (including blacks). Bezuidenhout (talk) 20:47, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

2008 Talk Page Redux! Apartheid on Wikipedia

"Really, guys? Whites in Zimbabwe? You really wrote an entire article about it? With photos of white people from Zimbabwe? Yikes."

The above statement from 2008 just about sums it up..

Elements of this article-entry belong either in History of Zimbabwe or Demographics of Zimbabwe

Low and behold that we have a White South African;

So I guess Apartheid is alive and well in Wikipedia.. this is too funny to be true.

Merging of pages anyone?

--Star Log, Lfrankblam, Kirk Out (talk) 04:46, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

I presume you also want to merge African American into History of the United States or Demographics of the United States to be consistent? —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:05, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

- African Americans 13% of the US population; vs .2% of the Zimbabwe population at best, apartheid it is! --Star Log, Lfrankblam, Kirk Out (talk) 03:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

The white population was historically much higher, around 5–6% of the population in the 1960s; see here for detailed figures and proportions from 1901 to 1969. Even if this were not the case the very small size of the white minority today does not make it "apartheid" to have an article about it. Your assertion is ridiculous. —  Cliftonian (talk)  04:42, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 26 July 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:15, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

---

White people in Zimbabwe → White Rhodesians – I know many Rhodesians and their descendants, and all of them identify as "Rhodesian", not "Zimbabwean", as Mugabe's Zimbabwe has been extremely brutal and discriminatory towards whites. I think it should be at "White Rhodesians" instead of "Rhodesians", as the latter could very easily be interpreted to mean "citizens of Rhodesia". Bobby Martnen (talk) 05:50, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

• Comment isn't this two separate topics, those who are White Rhodesians, and other white people found in Zimbabwe, such as those who arrived after Mugabe-rule, thus should be split in two? -- 67.70.32.190 (talk)

• Strong Oppose - Yes there are a lot of White people from Zimbabwe that identify as Rhodesian but I would even contest that the majority refer to themselves as White Zimbabwean. All references to Rhodesia have been erased and this article is clearly about... you guessed it... White people in Zimbabwe (today). If you want to make an article on Whites in Rhodesia then go ahead but this is a current article not a historical one. I'm saying this as a white South African with dozens of white Zimbabean friends and family who all refer to themselves as White Zimbabwean as White Rhodesian is seen as nostalgic and borderline racist as it shows they can't get with the times (not my opinion but theirs). Bezuidenhout (talk) 10:16, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose. "Aw, shame!" as a white Zimbo would say. If we were talking about a purely historical group of people, I would probably agree, but we are not. There are still white people in Zimbabwe. That many who have left the country (overwhelmingly whites) still nostalgically refer to themselves as "Rhodesian" is beside the point. To say the white folks living in Zimbabwe now are not Zimbabweans but Rhodesians is anachronistic, a misrepresentation of how most of them perceive themselves and, in fact, playing right in the hands of the Mugabe clique that has so mistreated them. A good source on this is J L Fisher's Pioneers, Settlers, Aliens, Exiles: The Decolonisation of White Identity in Zimbabwe (ANU E Press, 2010). See in particular the discussion on the self-identification and outside perception of these people c. 2005–10 on p. 151:

"[A] few still thought of themselves as Rhodesians. ... [One said:] 'I'm a Rhodesian, not a Zimbabwean, because I can't identify with this new government.' For others, however, 'being called a Rhodesian grates. I'm offended when people refer today to Rhodesia or Rhodesians. I say "that is not the name of my country.' ... Progressive whites contrasted themselves with the 'when wes' who, while galvanised by political developments in their former homeland, vowed to remain Rhodesians forever. Living in the past, the 'when wes' were a source of irritation, perceived to have ossified rather than changed to meet the new political dispensation. Thus the majority of whites self-referred as Zimbabwean with 'no hyphens' and 'no qualifications'. ... Members of the ruling elite also made a terminological distinction along these lines, between Rhodesians, who had the temerity to take members of the government to court, and white Zimbabweans who 'support the President'".

• In short, in my view Bezuidenhout basically has it right in his comment above. Hope this helps, cheers. —  Cliftonian (talk)  11:11, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

How about having this article be about White people in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe post-1980, and creating an article called "White Rhodesians" about Whites in Rhodesia prior to 1980 and their descendants overseas. This seems like a good compromise. Bobby Martnen (talk) 17:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

To what purpose do you want to split the article? What do you mean by compromise? The consensus is against using the old name of the country in the title. Splitting an article just for the opportunity to use an old term in the title makes little sense. Greenman (talk) 19:15, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Agree with Greenman, what is the point? What is the difference with making such an article and then a "Whites in South Africa pre-1994?" Just because the state was renamed doesn't mean we can rename the people. If you want to talk about whites in Rhodesia then either edit the Rhodesia article under demographics or edit this one in a historical sense. There really isn't much to write in an article because "White Rhodesians" and "White Zimbabweans" are the same people Bezuidenhout (talk) 20:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

We already have such an article for South Africa, it's called Afrikaaner ; which is different from White South African -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:30, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Er, what? Afrikaners are a specific group of people, not all white people in South Africa. You have Afrikaners in Zimbabwe and other countries too. —  Cliftonian (talk)  06:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it's called an analogy. The analogous situation in South Africa is with two articles, one on Whites (White South African) and one on the South African ethnicity (Afrikaaner). I'm not saying anything about Afrikaaners being the homologous ethnic group in Zimbabwe, which they are not, since they are from South Africa. The situation in Zimbabwe would be those who self-identify as a particular ethnicity, and those who are just White. -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 06:18, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Well it's a terrible analogy. You might as well make an article titled "East Germans" or "Soviets". Also are you purposely mispelling Afrikaner to annoy us? #troll Bezuidenhout (talk) 08:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

It's Afrikaner, not "Afrikaaner". And we already have an article on Rhodies (two, in fact, as we also have one on Rhodie bars). —  Cliftonian (talk)  07:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

The fact that you call it Afrikaaner shows how little knowledge you have on the topic. Afrikaners are a sub group of White South Africans AT PRESENT. You are suggesting a historical article on an ethnic group which already exists. "White Rhodesians" exist.. and you're on their article right now. I can't believe you're comparing Afrikaners to White "Rhodesians"? Bezuidenhout (talk) 11:02, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Does the article pointed out above, at Rhodie, satisfy the nominator's need for a White Rhodesian article? -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 04:44, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose Nominator's nomination is based on an individual's anecdotal experience. Not all white people in Zimbabwe necessarily identify as Rhodesians. Nor do they necessarily identify as Zimbabweans, but they are in Zimbabwe. —Lowellian (reply) 16:11, 27 July 2015 (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.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on White people in Zimbabwe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.zimstat.co.zw/dmdocuments/Census/CensusResults2012/National_Report.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:11, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed that PDF was correctly substituted with archived version. Thanks, Cyberbot II. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:33, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

"formerly Rhodesia"

The country was never accepted internationally as Rhodesia. Should a wiki article use it as if it were legitimate? "the southern African country Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia and Southern Rhodesia before that)" What did the British and everyone else call it after UDI?--Richardson mcphillips (talk) 21:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Of course it was called Rhodesia. Where did you get the idea that it wasn't? Reliable sources, please. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 22:15, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 33 external links on White people in Zimbabwe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080701125749/http://www.news24.com:80/News24/Africa/Zimbabwe/0,,2-11-1662_2349542,00.html to http://www.news24.com/News24/Africa/Zimbabwe/0,,2-11-1662_2349542,00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120207125507/http://www.zwnews.com/issuefull.cfm?ArticleID=10776 to http://www.zwnews.com/issuefull.cfm?ArticleID=10776
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110612015430/http://www.thestage.co.uk/features/feature.php/20883/working-to-bring-hope-harare-international to http://www.thestage.co.uk/features/feature.php/20883/working-to-bring-hope-harare-international
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110208171302/http://www.bgtw.org/bgtw-announces-britains-top-travel-writers-photographers-2010.html to http://www.bgtw.org/bgtw-announces-britains-top-travel-writers-photographers-2010.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070510123208/http://msupress.msu.edu:80/bookTemplate.php?bookID=2954 to http://msupress.msu.edu/bookTemplate.php?bookID=2954
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100330170323/http://www.orangeprize.co.uk:80/show/feature/orange-lauren-liebenberg to http://www.orangeprize.co.uk/show/feature/orange-lauren-liebenberg
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070127164259/http://www.bbc.co.uk:80/tyne/content/articles/2006/07/07/freshlyground_feature.shtml to http://www.bbc.co.uk/tyne/content/articles/2006/07/07/freshlyground_feature.shtml
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090902233726/http://www.chicagotribune.com:80/topic/nyc-interpreter,0,4909413.story to http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/nyc-interpreter,0,4909413.story
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070115023657/http://www.news24.com:80/News24/Africa/Zimbabwe/0,9294,2-11-1662_2053821,00.html to http://www.news24.com/News24/Africa/Zimbabwe/0,9294,2-11-1662_2053821,00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120206015906/http://www.newzimbabwe.com:80/pages/quit12.14272.html to http://www.newzimbabwe.com/pages/quit12.14272.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131003233057/http://www.newzimbabwe.com:80/pages/SENATE212.14368.HTML to http://www.newzimbabwe.com/pages/senate212.14368.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110927070303/http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2004/07/whites_flee_zim.php to http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2004/07/whites_flee_zim.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100923161530/http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk:80/index.php?option=com_content to http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=12377:morgan-won-secret-police-docs&catid=31:top%20zimbabwe%20stories&Itemid=66
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081123091414/http://www.maryellenmark.com/text/magazines/london_sunday_times/904G-000-005.html to http://www.maryellenmark.com/text/magazines/london_sunday_times/904G-000-005.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070615023739/http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf to http://www.zwnews.com/3-Main%20Body.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on White people in Zimbabwe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130222075611/http://www.dailynews.co.zw:80/index.php/sport/36-sports/6390-zims-crown-prince-of-soccer.html to http://www.dailynews.co.zw/index.php/sport/36-sports/6390-zims-crown-prince-of-soccer.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121008211309/http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/07/21/africa/AF-Zimbabwe-Glance.php to http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/07/21/africa/AF-Zimbabwe-Glance.php
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080421212327/http://iafrica.com:80/news/specialreport/zimbabwe/463523.htm to http://iafrica.com/news/specialreport/zimbabwe/463523.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110524225816/http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/06/ap/africa/main4848280.shtml to http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/06/ap/africa/main4848280.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:29, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Article rename

@CentreLeftRight: @Christian75: just to note that I have reverted the move of this article made in September 2016, and have also not carried out Christian75's requested talk page move from WP:RMTR this morning. If you look at the move request above, you'll see that the title of this article is a controversial issue, and both "White Rhodesians" and also (explicitly in some cases) "White Zimbabweans" were rejected there. If you want to pursue this further, I suggest a fresh WP:RM entry. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 11:26, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

@Amakuru: Fine with me. I just wanted the talk page to be together with the article. Thanks. Christian75 (talk) 11:38, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on White people in Zimbabwe. 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.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=ZE3PM2FPNPMZVQFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?xml=%2Fnews%2F2005%2F06%2F11%2Fwdad111.xml
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=ZE3PM2FPNPMZVQFIQMGSFFWAVCBQWIV0?xml=%2Fnews%2F2005%2F06%2F11%2Fwdad111.xml
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8619492.stm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/8594479.stm
• Replaced archive link x with https://web.archive.org/web/20171125220855/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/24/emmerson-mnangagwa-set-sworn-new-zimbabwe-president/ on http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/24/emmerson-mnangagwa-set-sworn-new-zimbabwe-president/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Suggestions for Cleanup

Hi all, been reading through the article, and I feel like it could use with a clean up. The article tends to over emphasize the topic of farming and land reform in a way that detracts from the rest of the article, with the same information either restated multiple times or an unnecessay amount of examples to this topic. Given the time it was written its unsurprising the amount of attention given to farming, but surely the history of white Zimbabweans cannot be reduced to farmers and white millionaires. It would be more interesting if it highlighted minority groups such as Afrikaners, Greeks and Portuguese as well as the country's political and industrial development.