|
|
||
Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
:It is not constructive to put in Wikipedia something else in place of what the cited sources actually say. Report them faithfully. Or find a reliable source that says what you want Wikipedia to say. If you desisted from putting your own ideas in place of what the sources say, the number of citations would be much less. Your persistence makes it necessary to add more until even you recognize their weight. Perhaps you will find interesting today's additions, which include more than one testimony to the fact that the women and girls at the court who became Christians were not punished. The ''Gay Star News'' report is there so as to try to remove any idea that Mwamga's proclivity for homosexual activity was unrelated to what happened, an idea whose existence might seem to be suggested by the efforts made to remove or at least limit any mention of it. |
:It is not constructive to put in Wikipedia something else in place of what the cited sources actually say. Report them faithfully. Or find a reliable source that says what you want Wikipedia to say. If you desisted from putting your own ideas in place of what the sources say, the number of citations would be much less. Your persistence makes it necessary to add more until even you recognize their weight. Perhaps you will find interesting today's additions, which include more than one testimony to the fact that the women and girls at the court who became Christians were not punished. The ''Gay Star News'' report is there so as to try to remove any idea that Mwamga's proclivity for homosexual activity was unrelated to what happened, an idea whose existence might seem to be suggested by the efforts made to remove or at least limit any mention of it. |
||
:I must thank you for being the occasion for me to learn increasingly more about this group of Christian martyrs who I knew existed but of whom I had nothing of the detailed knowledge you have helped me to gain about some fascinating aspects and to put in the article. I look forward to learning yet more. [[User:Esoglou|Esoglou]] ([[User talk:Esoglou|talk]]) 18:12, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
:I must thank you for being the occasion for me to learn increasingly more about this group of Christian martyrs who I knew existed but of whom I had nothing of the detailed knowledge you have helped me to gain about some fascinating aspects and to put in the article. I look forward to learning yet more. [[User:Esoglou|Esoglou]] ([[User talk:Esoglou|talk]]) 18:12, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
||
:: |
::Sure, great that we're learning things. I've made some small amendments and think I'm happy as things are now. [[User:Contaldo80|Contaldo80]] ([[User talk:Contaldo80|talk]]) 08:50, 20 October 2014 (UTC) |
![]() | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on June 3, 2009, June 3, 2010, June 3, 2011, June 3, 2012, June 3, 2013, and June 3, 2014. |
http://www.buganda.com/martyrs.htm if this is so its noteworthy that a gay king killing christians because of their antohomosexuality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.231.182.113 (talk) 07:52, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So why were the martyrs killed? An explanation is given only for the English bishop, not for any of the natives. 02:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
1. That the former Kingdom of Buganda is now part of Uganda is noted in the 1st ¶, so it′s redundant in the 2nd.
2. Shouldn′t the Kingdom of Buganda have a capital K?
☺ Dick Kimball (talk) 13:34, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Esoglou, would you mind if we tried to summarise the two block quotes in the middle of the article? I generally think articles read better if they draw upon sources rather than repeat them word for word. I've had a go but would welcome your thoughts in case you think any important point has been left out. At the same time I've moved some of the text about to try and make it flow better. It's also a bit tricky to try and tease out the elements of the story. I think it would help if we had a better set of sources - at the moment they are made up of blogs and articles. I've added the Dictionary of African Historical Biography which might be a start. The challenge is to get to the historical facts. The motivation for the slaughter seems motivated primarily by political concerns rather than Mwanga's personal caprices (although that's important) - indeed there is evidence that he promoted Christians to important positions before and after the massacre. Contaldo80 (talk) 08:03, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I remain concerned about the over-labouring of "homosexual" in the text. The previous version has: "Ward states: "The immediate cause of the killings was the refusal of the pages to engage in homosexual practices." Other sources too say that Mwanga ordered the execution of the Christian converts who, in line with the teaching of their new faith, "resisted his homosexual advances", his action being "sparked off by the Christian pages' repulsion of his homosexual advances"."
Aside from saying the same thing three times, I think it is simply unnecessary to use the word "homosexual" when "sexual" will do. And it's not sufficient, I'm afraid, to say that this is the wording in other sources (besides which the GSN quote is from a guy called "Junior Mayema, an African LGBTI activist" - hardly authoritative and the rest of the article tallks about "gay sex"). I have seen nothing to suggest that the fact that this was one man having sex with other men that was specifically contrary to the faith of the martyrs. But rather the violation, rape and murder of the individuals that was abhorrent. It's true that the majority of sexual violation resulting in Christian martyrdom and sainthood have historically been heterosexual, and therefore it helps to make plain to the reader that this was different - the pages were male. That's why I'm willing to accept Ward's quote at the start. But then to say it two more times risks taking a discriminatory and heavy-handed approach. In which case I would expect that all articles that have a man violating a Christian woman on wikipedia use terminology around "heterosexual advances" to ensure balance. The risk is this plays to a politicising narrative that has gay men exploiting poor innocent African believers. A narrative that has been demonstrated to be wrong because we know that the context was one of resisting colonialism and the defiance of authority.
Please take my opinions into account. I'm trying to be collaborative and constructive. If you think we need to refer to "homosexuality" again and again then either please clarify that it is homosexuality that is particularly important in terms of the martyrdom (and not rape), or commit to amending other articles to distinguish that the violations were of a heterosexual character. Contaldo80 (talk) 08:40, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]