Talk:Fore people

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Zhangee24.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Fore/Kuru
There is already an excellent article on Kuru. I think a lot of the information on this page (Fore) duplicates that - it doesn't seem to be about the people themselves. -- Purple 03:57, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * This is a horrible article. Most of the important information about the prion disease is missing or incoorect.  For example; women, children and the elderly ate the brain, internal organs and bones while the men ate the muscle.  Prions are concentrated in the brain mostly and that's why there were such high numbers of dead women, kids and elderly.  Also, it was ritualistic cannabalism, so they did it out of respect so they would live eternally in the bodies of their family.  After cannabalism stopped, kuru still inflicted the Fore people because it takes a long time for the disease to take effects.  Who everwrote this artcile, do you even know what a prion is?  Just because you can write stuff on wikipedia doesn't mean you should, make sure you get the fucking information right. You're not special cause you published something on wikipedia, you're an idiot for posting the wrong info. Bob —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.121.119.102 (talk • contribs)

Dab problems
Remarks on Fore: This is unclear and imprecise, and an arrogent approch, refusing a name place for hundreds of years to be clearly visible. You are refusing individuals an alternative and existing definition to what Fore means by annexing this to a sub-titled page annexed to one side. YOUR PAGE IS THEREFORE NOT HELPFUL to those searching for more current and more relevant information to them than Fore/Kuru. Please do something that is satisfactory, before it becomes necessay to call an arbitrator. For your benefit, you are invited to investigate the different beauties and realities of FORE upon google, hopefully you will open to another reality. Merry season of Christmas. Peter Gavigan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter gavigan (talk • contribs)
 * My dear friend... please calm down! What do you mean exactly? The fact that there is a Fore Abbey and Village in Ireland? Is that it? Well... there are several solutions to this disambiguation problem. One is to keep as is, that is to say, with a link to Fore Abbey in Fore (disambiguation) (already done it). Another, that implies more work, is to make Fore a disambiguation page that links to all the articles listed in Fore (disambiguation), renaming the present Fore article into Fore (people) or Fore (Papua New Guinea). You could also move the present Fore article to one of the ones I just mentioned and then make Fore a redirect page to Fore (disambiguation). I'll do that then. Please, Peter, signed your talk with four tilds (4 times ~). Seasons Greetings! The Ogre 17:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Done it! The Ogre 17:29, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Done What ????

a) You are advised to visit the definition < >, Revise what has been pragrmatically expressed in the associated remarks earlier, and then propose acceptable solutions, b) Leave the woffle aside, to our minds this is not even close to being resolved acceptably.

In all sincerety, your page must be reasonable for everyone. It must be acceptable to all interested parties. Now please read again what was initially stated, having viewed < > as an example in the english wikipedia.

If your prefer Irish or French, we can also manage both,

Above all,propose acceptable solutions, and with all sincerety, Merry Season of Christmas, and Happy new year 2007.

About signing, sorry, like you, we are learing,

Peter Gavigan

Region under control?
Under the History heading, there is a sentence that I find difficult to comprehend (in bold):

In addition to government officers, other outsiders began to enter Fore territory. Anthropologists Ronald and Catherine Berndt spent time with the North Fore in 1953, while missionaries and traders penetrated further south. The Fore underwent considerable cultural change as a result of this contact: they traded with the outsiders, began growing coffee, and started to adopt a money-based economy. Gordon T. Linsley, a patrol officer stationed at Okapa, noted the rapid pace of social change among the Fore in a 1951 report. He observed that village warfare had declined considerably, the young Fore men seemingly glad to have an excuse to quit fighting. The region was already under control and some villages were relocating from the high ridges down to their gardens. Rest houses were present in the larger villages and separate men's houses remained only in the more isolated villages. Many people regularly used the 'rough track' to travel to Kainantu and were able to see the latest fashions and hear Pidgin spoken. Broad paths linked communities together; however, Linsley noted inter-district fighting persisted and accusations of sorcery were still common in Purosa.

What does "under control" mean here? Does it simply mean people lived there? Or were the people there fighting less? Or were the patrol officers exerting power over the inhabitants? Or... ? Does anyone know what this clause is stating? MisterDub (talk) 18:37, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
 * By "under control," I meant under the control of the Australian government. I'll clarify that in the article.-Schnurrbart (talk) 23:04, 23 July 2010 (UTC)