Talk:Qemant people

Graham Hancock
I can't help noticing that Graham Hancock is listed as a reference here. Can someone point out which bits come from that source, so they can be checked with due care? His academic reputation is hardly good... - Mustafaa 20:48, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I created this page because I was interrested in these people and the ancient form of Judaism, which I had read about in Graham Hancock's book the Sign and The Seal. So if you check my original version, all info there comes from that book. You will see that it is quite accurate. also you must note that this was his first book to by widely published (before, he was a reporter). His later books contain much more fiction and mumbo-jumbo, I agree on that, but TS&TS really is a great book. Patrick1982 21:43, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I am the creator of this wikipage about the Qemant, see Here for my final version.
 * Um...I'm concerned by your the assertion that the religion of the Qemant is an "ancient form of Judaism", which should be reflected by my edits. There is no indication that their religion is an ancient form of Judaism, at least not that I've been able to ascertain, although it is variously claimed that it is a primitivistic form of Judaism.  This is a POV claim, asserting simultaneously that animism and paganism are "primitive", and that Judaism developed out of animism and paganism rather than as a result of a revelation.  While it is clear even from the historical testimony of Judaism's sacred writings, that the earliest adherents of what we regard as the most ancient forms of "Judaism" were, prior to their "conversion", pagans or pantheists or, arguably, animists, there is little evidence that Judaism actually evolved from such belief systems.  Tomer TALK  08:54, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * This is not my POV, but that of the American scholar Frederic C. Gamst. I see no reason to doubt the view of a scholar, unless another scholar brings a new theory forward with credible evidence. I think I can obtain I copy of his book in 1 or 2 weeks, so I could then perhaps provide more info.There have been little books written on the Qemant people, and it must be noted that there is only a small percentage of their people still practising this old religion, the main part of the population has been converted to christianity.
 * Fine. I modified my comment.  It wasn't meant to be an attack on you, but rather a comment about the fact that the assertion is inherently not written in accordance with NPOV, no matter who makes it. Tomer TALK  17:50, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Population
Mustafaa gives a estimated population of 172,000 people. However, I cannot find any refferences to this number on the internet. Actually most websites give the number 20,000 - 25,000 people. This estimate would make more sence to me. I will however not change the article at this moment, untill someone can provide more info. Patrick1982 21:43, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * My reference is a book, The Kemantney Language. However, the figure is confirmed by Ethnologue, Humboldt-Kosmos, and Dr. David Appleyard, and derives ultimately from the national census. - Mustafaa 21:59, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Name
Is Qemant correct? The Encyclopaedia Aethiopica has their article at Kəmant (can also be transliterated as Kimānt), and I'm inclined to believe them. &mdash; ዮም  |  (Yom)  |  Talk  • contribs • Ethiopia 04:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

"Qemant" is the form used by F. Gamst in the book he wrote about them after his anthropological field study, so it is the established form. J S Ayer (talk) 03:18, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Qemant people. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101115052151/http://www.csa.gov.et/surveys/Population%20and%20Housing%20Census%201994/survey0/data/docs%5Creport%5CStatistical_Report%5Ck03%5Ck03_partI.pdf to http://www.csa.gov.et/surveys/Population%20and%20Housing%20Census%201994/survey0/data/docs%5Creport%5CStatistical_Report%5Ck03%5Ck03_partI.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120214221803/http://www.csa.gov.et/pdf/Cen2007_firstdraft.pdf to http://www.csa.gov.et/pdf/Cen2007_firstdraft.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

NPOV and Unreliable Sources
I have a concern about two of the sources cited in the article, which currently make up most of the "history" section. One is Graham Hancock, a popular press pseudo-archaeologist, who is definitively considered to be an unreliable source for any claim on Wikpedia, per RSN. He's reporting something a priest said in an alleged interview; I can't find any secondary evidence outside Hancock's book that this man even exists. However, I have no reason to doubt that he does or that Graham met him.

But the entire section is dependent on Graham's description, first saying that it is an "ancient legend", "oral history", etc. These are the sorts of claims Graham shouldn't be used for, given his unscientific theories and lack of research methodology. And since it's necessarily sourced to his book, I doubt any of it can be used. So I'll be taking it out.

The second source is Yohannes Wolde Mariam, the book being cited called "Yealem Tarik", published in 1948. To be clear, this is not the university professor of the same name; I'm not sure the latter would have even been born yet. I've been completely unable to track down any copy of the book, even one in Amharic, let alone an English translation. However (and correct me if I'm mistaken), I think I have identified the author. From what I could gather, he's an evangelical missionary, who also served as translator for other missionaries after the Italian fascists were driven out. If this person is the identified author of the text, then it likely makes sense that I wouldn't be able to find the text, if it was a text produced for missionary purposes. It does seem to use a creationist dating, but one would expect a folk tale to do so.

I'm only somewhat confident in my identification of the author, and its from incidental mentions. As I said, I can't find the book. If I'm wrong, please tell me, and feel free to discuss it here.

Whatever the provenance of the second source, the whole point of having references is so that we have verifiable citations, and from contextually reliable sources.

In an article about an ethnic, linguistic, or ethnolinguistic group... I would posit that such sourcing be ones that are peer-reviewed, academic, and/or at least subject to editorial oversight and fact checking. Otherwise, incorrect information spreads very quickly.

With that being said, I'll be removing both the quotations and analysis cited to those non-RSes.

As for the latter, see the edit summary for the Yohannes W.M. removal. I do have some concern that all mention I could find of author/book paired together was cyclical, and was just the same copied reference from Wikipedia. This is used a ref on a few pages on here, and it's always the same pages. Quinto Simmaco (talk) 04:00, 9 November 2017 (UTC)