Hi Bobby
 
The people generally prefer to use their individual group names (e.g. !Kung, Khwe, Gwi - spelling debatable), which would be used in titles for separate Wikipedia articles on each group.
 
They are divided on a collective term (which is essentially a choice between San, Bushmen and Basarwa), so it would be the luck of the draw which answer you get from one person. Since 1993 their representatives have chosen San as the more neutral term (and confirmed it in 1996 and 1997 with no change since then).
 
Regards
Helen 
----- Original Message -----
From: bobby shabangu
To: Helen Riding
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 12:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia ZA] Wikipedia move discussion: Bushmen article

Hi Helen and Nkansah,
 
I think the easiest thing is to ask one of these people because according to my understanding they are divided into many groups, you might find out that they don't call themselves "San people or Bushmen" , they might be the khoi san, the Nama, they might be the Nkqa/qa or something very different from what we English speakers know them to be, otherwise for the artilcle i feel San people has more dignity to refer to a people. i'll check out the article later on !
 
Regards
Bobby 

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Helen Riding <helenriding@mweb.co.za> wrote:
Hi Rexford
 
Thanks for your interest.
 
I personally don't think "Bushmen" is a completely inappropriate term (although some people have strong feelings either way). The question here is really what the primary term or default term is, in terms of what reliable English language sources use and what the people themselves prefer.
 
I agree that the content of the article (and many others) needs improving. I have focussed only on the nomenclature section so far. It is a lot of work overhauling an article completely and I have come to terms with the fact that I can only do so much on my own.
 
Regards
Helen
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 10:36 AM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia ZA] Wikipedia move discussion: Bushmen article

Hi Helen,

I just read through the discussion and its interesting for me so far. Many support the idea of changing to San people.

Well, I think it doesn't _really_ matter whether its 'San people' or 'bushmen'. Though the name 'bushman' might sound completely inappropriate ( or even perhaps insulting), I think content on the page is what really needs to be improved.

Personally, I've never known them to be San people (until today) and I'm sure many people ( perhaps over 70% of the world ) know such people as bushmen.

Currently, the article 'San people' redirects to 'Bushmen' which I see it to be same. (Changing the title will just make the redirection inverse)

If the word 'bushmen' its inappropriate, then I guess it shouldn't be mentioned even in the article, even if the title is changed to 'San people'

Rexford | Africa Center | wikiafrica.net | sent from Tab

On Jan 16, 2014 10:12 AM, "Helen Riding" <helenriding@mweb.co.za> wrote:
Hi, this is my first mailing to this list so I hope it's appropriate.
 
I have proposed a move from the "Bushmen" Wikipedia article title to "San people". If you have not already done so, please participate in the move discussion so we can reach a consensus.
 
The last discussion took place almost two years ago with little participation despite numerous complaints posted on the article talk page. I spent some time researching the facts and improving the nomenclature section of the article so that people could make a more informed decision.
 
 
Thanks
Helen

_______________________________________________
WikimediaZA mailing list
WikimediaZA@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaza


_______________________________________________
WikimediaZA mailing list
WikimediaZA@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaza