Talk:Rastafari/Archive 7

Politics
Irie

the part on politics is very short and says the false when it says Rastafarians are not involved in politics.

Walter Rodney was running for legislation and after Marcus Garvey he gave voice to many secularized ideals behing Rastafarianism.

He ran the Working People's Alliance and his importance into the history of Rastafarianism is stated also by Horace Campbell.

InI think the section should be expanded mostly referring to the good accounts Campbell does in his Rasta Resistance book.

Selah

jaromil (talk) 18:59, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey Jaromil, it's recommended to put new comments at the bottom. I'm not very familiar with the Rastafari Movement, but maybe someone who is will make the additions you're suggesting; you could do it yourself of course. L.cash.m (talk) 08:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Citation problems
There are a plethora of citations in the introductory section, but they become very scarce in the article itself. Additionally, many things about the origins of the Rasta belief system are not explained -- we are made aware that it exists and what the beliefs are, but not why -- for example, grounation day and other holidays are mentioned, but I'm uncertain as to what these holidays celebrate. L.cash.m (talk) 08:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)


 * You should not be uncertain as to why Grounation Day is celebrated; this information is in, and has always been in the article. Do you have any other specific examples?  I removed the citecheck tag, as it does not match your complaint and is even more unfounded.  Thanks, Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 16:55, 7 December 2012 (UTC)


 * You are correct that the info was there; I am not sure why I tagged that particular section. By the way "is even more unfounded" seems a bit harsh -- perhaps you should consider your attitude in your responses.  L.cash.m (talk) 20:39, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Off-topic first sentence
I made this edit because the first sentence went off topic speaking about a country rather than the movement. This was reverted on a false premise that Rastafari is not a religion when several sources do describe it as a religion. I dont mind rewording it to "Rastafari is a spiritual and religious movement". The current excessive weight on a country is also clearly unacceptable. Pass a Method  talk  19:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * There are also all kinds of sources describing the Rastafari movement as all sorts of other things, eg. "cult". That doesn't mean these are "neutral sources", not even necessarily very well-informed sources.  There are also plenty of sources specifically stating that it is NOT a religion, or that the adherents themselves object to it being called a religion, and their POV is of course significant to the topic, as with any other article about a spiritual movement.  "Religion" properly refers to something that is a bit more centralized or organized than Rastafari has ever been.  And I feel Rastafari is unlikely to ever become a "religion" - most Rastas have an innate distrust of such supreme organizational hierarchies, that they say are historically open to infiltration by opposing interests from the moment they are established.  In their view, by not having any centralized organization, there is nothing to infiltrate, freedom of conscience is preserved, and if one mansion were to be infiltrated in this manner, it could not speak for any others. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:02, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * As a compromise a will implement my compromise above. Pass a Method   talk  21:49, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Unilaterally reverting back to your version, which I have just got done explaining is simply incorrect, is hardly a "compromise". A "compromise" is when disagreeing parties come to some kind of agreement on something.  Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 23:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Firstly, information about the "culture" and ethnicity of jamaica may be relevant in the history section but why in the first sentence? Secondly, i did not revert it to my version, i called it a religious and spiritual movement. Should i open an rfc for my version or are you willing to suggest a compromise yourself? Pass a Method   talk  23:51, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't see any need for one, since I have already explained above why Rastafari is a "movement", does not meet the definition of "religion", adherents demonstrably object to being labeled as one, and we should refrain from defining it into one, even if some "sources" do. You have not acknowledged or addressed any of these points, but seem to be obliviously pressing ahead with your perception of the movement as a "religion"  anyway, so it may be a case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 00:07, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thats secondary. My biggest problem with the current lede is its focus on jamiacan culture and ethnicity rather than rastafarianism. Shouldn't that be addressed? Pass a Method   talk  00:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


 * OK, the part you're trying to remove says Jamaica is "a country with a predominantly Christian culture where 98% of the people were the black African descendants of slaves". I take it that you don't dispute that this is correct data, but you still don't want it, as you consider it "off topic" to Rastafari? Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 00:47, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Correct. But i dont mind moving it to the second paragraph or to a subsection. Pass a Method  talk  01:03, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Spiritual use of cannabis
About "the smoking of cannabis enjoys Biblical sanction", "quote as justifying the use of cannabis": but earlier:
 * Genesis 1:11 "And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, (...)"
 * smoking cannabis, commonly referred to as herb, weed, kaya, sinsemilla (Spanish for 'without seeds'), (...)

So the Genesis citation makes it explicit that "herb" definitely does not include cannabis! => eat, not smoke! (same for the next 2 citations, referring rather to eating or other use). but Cannabis does not grow on trees... These references are rather contradicting the "claim", aren't they? &mdash; MFH:Talk 18:52, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Genesis 3:18 "... thou shalt eat the herb of the field."
 * Revelation 22:2 "(...) there was the tree of life, and the leaf from that tree is for the healing of the nations."


 * That may be your opinion based on original research, but we can't make much use of that. So are you saying that just because one variety of cannabis is called "sensemilla" meaning "without seeds" in Spanish, therefore you think ALL cannabis is "without seeds"? (!) And that therefore it is not covered by Genesis 1:11?  And also, make sure the original Greek word would distinguish between "tree" and "plant", not that it matters anyway, because the important part you left out here says "They hold that..." making it a true statement, regardless of whether or not they are correct in anyone else's eyes. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 19:08, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

The Spanish name, though used, has always been a misnomer. Anyone with any knowledge of such things is aware the plant has seeds. 86.42.93.7 (talk) 13:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

The interpretation that they provide is based on the authorized translation (aka King James Version). Modern scholarly translations render this as "plant" not "herb" (RSV, NRSV, ESV, NIV (similar, different wording, but "plant", not "herb"). "Herb" is archaic in usage here, and goes against modern scholarship, not to mention botany.

As it stands, the "dinner of herbs" passage (Proverbs 15:17) referred to later in the article does hold up across versions, but the Genesis 1:11 passage does not, nor does the Genesis 3:18 passage or the Psalm 104:14 passage ("plants" not "herbs"), and the Revelation passage in the article omits a fairly significant part of that passage from the Authorized (KJV) version: "which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month". This seems like a bit of a stretch.

None of this affects Rastas' interpretation of these verses, but it is also fair to say that if these particular verses as establishing a key doctrine of their faith, it is at the very least worth noting their origin, given that it comes from a specific translation of the Bible that would have been widely disseminated in Jamaica at the time. Consequently, that particular translation/interpretation is historic, noteworthy, not universal, and should be attributed. 69.125.230.41 (talk) 05:51, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Trinitarian in the Rastafari movement
The article is unclear what Rastas mean by trinity. What is currently there seems to be sourced from here: (or vice versa, who knows; I'm assuming the former since what's on the wiki page is a subset of the following page) http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_rasta_trinity

In the article: Rastafari doctrines concerning the Trinity include stressing the significance of the name "Haile Selassie," meaning power of the Trinity, might of the Trinity, or powerful trinity in Ge'ez (the name given to Ras Tafari upon his baptism and later assumed as part of his regnal name at his November 2, 1930 coronation by the Ethiopian Orthodox Church).

Not included in the article (from the other site): The Bobo Shanti trinity, consists of Marcus Garvey as the Holy prophet, King Emmanuel VII as the Holy Priest and Haile Selassie as the Divine King. For the most part Rastas believe Haile Selassie to be both God the Father and God the Son, but God the Spirit lives within us.

The current section on the trinity is exceedingly vague, unsourced, and gives no sense of what "trinity" actually means in terms of the beliefs of Rastafaris. The topic also seems to be in dispute, and I therefore suggest it be amended to observe the conflicting interpretations. 69.125.230.41 (talk) 05:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Found this, which seems to provide a more nuanced view: (article also indicates that the Coptic view (which the article currently seems to lean towards) is in the minority) FROM: The many faces of Rasta: Doctrinal Diversity within the Rastafari Movement Author(s): MICHAEL BARNETT Source: Caribbean Quarterly, Vol. 51, No. 2 (June 2005), pp. 67-78

The BoboShante belief system is centered on the Holy Trinity which for them consists of Prophet,Priest and King. The Prophet is Marcus Garvey, while the "High Priest" is Prince Emmanuel, and the King is Haile Selassie I.(71)

For the Coptics,the Rastafari Holy Trinity is that of man,the herb and the word.(73) Haile Selassi is seen only as a king, not as divine.(76)

For the Nyahbinghi mansion, the entire Trinity, (Father, Son, Holy Spirit), is embodied by Haile Selassie I. (76)

The twelve tribes of Israel hold two competing perspectives: 1) Haile Selassie is the second coming of Christ that the Bible refers to in the Book of Revelations, 2) Haile Selassie I is the comforter, the Holy Spirit, or as popularly conceived by many of the brethren as having the same spirit coursing through him as Jesus Christ of Nazareth did 2000 odd years ago. (76)

69.125.230.41 (talk) 07:09, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * It's a lot more complicated than that. There is also a view modeled after Haile Selassie's own teachings, that considers the Trinity (Ethiopic: "Selassie") to be 1) God the Father, 2) God the Son, and 3) the Holy Spirit. The Messiah of course refers to "God the Son" in the Orthodox view. These three parts of JAH correspond to mind, body and heart. However the wide disparity of views among Rastas is not seen as a major issue, and there is not likely ever to be any kind of "central body" defining heresy for Rastas, because of the Rastas' implicit distrust of anything remotely resembling this. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 13:20, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

That's interesting. Perhaps the paragraph should reflect the diversity of thought on this matter then? Right now, it's really unclear what it means. While there may not be agreement, it's better to represent the positions than what is there presently. I doubt there's a Rasta inquisition in the works, but if they believe different things, and it seems they do, it's good to represent those doctrinal differences; we'd do the same for Methodists/Presbyterians or Therevadan/Mahayana Buddhism. The current section also lacks any citations, so it's really not clear whether it's original research or not.

I'm interested in your sources for what you're saying. Could you provide citations for them, please? 69.125.230.41 (talk) 04:55, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

How many people identify as Rastafari?
It seems that different sources (including the Haile Selassie page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haile_Selassie_I#cite_note-13 ; and the page it cites: http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html#Rastafarianism ) disagree as to the number of people who identify as rasta. Is there an accepted number? If there isn't, why isn't there?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.230.220.204 (talk) 06:00, 17 July 2013 (UTC)


 * why not? cos that is how it is, nothing we can do except use what is available. Thanks, ♫ SqueakBox talk contribs 23:24, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Possible conflict/ambiguity between lede and "Sects and Subdivisions"
The lede says: Most adherents see Haile Selassie I as Jah or Jah Rastafari, who is the second coming of Jesus Christ onto the earth, but to others he is simply God's chosen king on earth.

Sects and Subdivisions says: There are three main Mansions (sects or orders) of Rastafari today: the Nyahbinghi Order, Bobo Ashanti and the Twelve Tribes of Israel. All agree on the basic principles of the divine status of Haile Selassie and the importance of black images of divinity. Many Rastafari do not belong to any sect.

Is there a division between sect members and non-members as to Selassie's identity? It isn't clear to me who believes what about Selassie. "All agree" could at least warrant something along the lines of "all sects agree" as it doesn't seem that this is universal among those in the Rastafari movement based on the lede.

69.125.230.41 (talk) 05:08, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Uncited Content
Here is a list of sections which have no citations supporting any of their content:
 * Jah
 * Trinity
 * Iyesus Christos
 * The Howellites and The Ethiopian Salvation Society
 * Lion
 * Diet

There are many other sections which, though containing some citations, still contain other uncited content. It is very important that we find references to support these statements. I'm sure the statements themselves are true, but they need to be verified with inline citations. I have tried to flag many of these problems with the intent to find good references to support them (and hopefully to encourage others to do the same), but my edits have been reverted due to the fact that I made some changes without first discussing them. This article is fraught with vague words and unencyclopaedic language which is something that I usually try to omit (in the case of vague words) or re-phrase (for the sake of tone and flow without altering the gist of the content) when I come across it in an article, but it has been made clear to me that this article is not open to editing without prior discussion of the edits, and that certain people guarding this article do not assume good faith if they do not like your edits. I would love to see this article being improved upon. I am obviously not the person for the job, but I am posting this so that someone will look into these uncited sections and bolster them with some credible thrid-party sources (and better writing).I feel like a tourist (talk) 19:45, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Terminology
Hello. I arrived at the article trying to find the proper terminology to use in a written piece that mentions Rastafari. (I admit it's only a passing reference but I want to get it right.) I understand from this article that 'Rastafarianism' is not considered proper, and that 'Rastafari' for the movement and 'Rasta' for a follower or practitioner are accepted. I hope I read right. But I noticed one image with the caption, "Rastafarian man carrying a basket" - is 'Rastafarian' an acceptable term to use for an individual, and if so, which of 'Rastafarian' or 'Rasta' is preferred? (I ask this here because if the latter term is preferred the caption may need changing.) Thank you. - Coldwind487 (talk) 09:24, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Lack of Citations and Contradiction to Other Sources
Hi guys, just noticed when reading through this article there is a lack of citations, especially in parts where the information is contradictory to other internet sources (e.g. http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/rastafari/beliefs/beliefs_1.shtml). Its not for me to say which is right but maybe someone could address this?


 * Could you please let us know specifically what specific point you are dubious of? I am a Rastafari and would like nothing more than to have my faith represented accurately, but I would like nothing less than to have my faith misrepresented inaccurately by what we call "Babylonian" sources and"authorities" such as the BBC which did more than their fair share of works against the Haile Selassie government. 172.56.34.85 (talk) 13:17, 19 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Of course, understand you don't want to be misrepresented. I just noticed there was no citation in the "Equality" subsection of the "Politics" section. I imagine this may because you're writing from your own personal experience and understanding, but perhaps some citations would disprove those who misrepresent you?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by FvanBerkel12 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Linking this article from Ethiopia
All of the longstanding and easily verified facts mentioning the significance of Rastafari were summarily removed from Ethiopia yesterday by an insistent pair of editors who were also quite concerned that I not bring this issue up here, and leave it only to their judgement. However, after due deliberation, I have decided to mention this thing that is happening here as worthy of your attention. It seems that the article on Rastafari cannot be linked to or even alluded to now from Ethiopia. Not that this is a totally orphaned article, but it deserves a mention and a link from Ethiopia as significant to the topic at the least. Binghi Dad (talk) 17:28, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
 * For anyone interested, it appears this discussion was about the idea that while Ethiopia is extremely relevant to the framework of Rastafari, Rastafari hasn't had much impact on Ethiopia. Binghi Dad (apparently an WP:SPA) wanted to add material to the Ethiopia lede about Rastafari, other editors tried to explain that was WP:UNDUE, and ultimately Binghi Dad ended up blocked. I wasn't involved I was just curious about the above comment and skimmed the discussion. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  19:54, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 6 June 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: Moved (by Ritchie333). Natg 19 (talk) 00:32, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Rastafari movement → Rastafari – This title is a leftover of having another article at Rastafari in 2005, while this article was named Rastafarianism (another title which some adherents also find reductive or offensive). The current title is awkward, overly specific, and possibly reductive. Rastafari could be considered or applied as a movement, or a lifestyle, but it is primarily considered a religion (as it says in the lede). This article is about all things Rastafari. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  19:46, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. "Rastafari" is the WP:COMMONNAME as per Google Ngram. Khestwol (talk) 20:17, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. ONR (talk) 20:41, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment the 2005 version seems to be a prose-form disambiguation page -- 70.51.202.183 (talk) 07:11, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Support Per nom and comments. It also is how one refers to an adherent of Rastafari, so is an all-purpose name. Randy Kryn 10:00, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong support if the article Rastafari is currently a redirect to here. Pages named after plain titles should always be either real articles or disambiguation pages, never redirects. J I P  &#124; Talk 21:49, 8 June 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.

Renaming categories
I realized as I was putting together the proposal to rename the categories that having the same word apply to the religion as well as the adherants complicates things when they both have categories at less appropriate titles. If you are interested in helping decide a new name, please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion - Rastafarians. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  21:52, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 one external links on Rastafari. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121030070438/http://news.aol.com/story/_a/rasta-smoker-wins-appeal-of-marijuana/n20080711112609990016 to http://news.aol.com/story/_a/rasta-smoker-wins-appeal-of-marijuana/n20080711112609990016
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080101165850/http://rastaites.com:80/repatriationnews/09repatriation.htm to http://rastaites.com/repatriationnews/09repatriation.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090107000256/http://rastaites.com/news/hearticals/IRIEbarbados.htm to http://rastaites.com/news/hearticals/IRIEbarbados.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110511123525/http://www.neurope.eu/articles/21-April--Today-in-History/100364.php to http://www.neurope.eu/articles/21-April--Today-in-History/100364.php

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

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

rasta
wussup im a young rasta and i want to learn more about rastafari — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tooka6 (talk • contribs) 04:58, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Diet
I consulted this article for specific information on Rastafari diet and it would appear that the entire section needs a re-write. For example, "Wine is seen as a "mocker" and strong drink is "raging"; however, simple consumption of beer or the very common roots wine are not systematically a part of Rastafari culture this way or that." Hien? It's disappointing to find such twaddle in such an important article but I'm not qualified to help in this instance. --81.187.49.114 (talk) 10:44, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

Recent addition regarding Bob Marley
I have a problem with the recently added line " It should be noted that after Marley's visit to Ethiopia, he left the Rasta religion and converted to the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church.[61][62]" Firstly, the sources cited for this are not reliable (one isn't even really a source, just the name of a church with no descriptive info). However, after some discussion at the Bob Marley talk page, it would seem that there are indeed reliable sources saying he was baptized into the Ethiopian Orthodox Church shortly before his death. However, those reliable sources do not specifically mention his leaving the Rasta religion per-se, only his baptism into Ethiopian Orthodoxy. so phrasing it as "left the Rasta religion" it not necessarily correct without a source stating that they are mutually exclusive (His funeral was partially Rasta and partially Orthodox, so it would appear that joining one did not necessarily mean leaving the other). Also, what is the purpose of including this information here? Why should it be noted? This seems to be problematic in relation to NPOV. Bob Marley is only briefly mentioned, and does not seem to require this kind of addition, so in this context it seems a bit WP:UNDUE. Is it really notable and necessary to this section? As per WP:ONUS, which states "While information must be verifiable in order to be included in an article, this does not mean that all verifiable information must be included in an article. Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article, and that it should be omitted or presented instead in a different article." it seems that this information being covered on Bob Marley's own page would be enough coverage. UnequivocalAmbivalence (talk) 01:52, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I am going to remove the sentence as it specifically violates MOS:NOTE which clearly states "Avoid such phrases as remember that and note that, which address readers directly in an unencyclopedic tone." UnequivocalAmbivalence (talk) 10:20, 3 December 2015

(UTC)
 * I changed the wording, so you can be a little less nitpicky now (hopefully). Whether or not you consider the sources reliable is irrelevant since there are several and we do.Trinacrialucente (talk) 17:26, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Firstly, go ahead and give WP:CIVIL a read, and avoid personal attacks. Secondly, those are not reliable sources no matter what you personally feel. There ARE reliable sources for that info, but the website you are providing is not one of them. Thirdly, you have not answered my question as to why this information should be included here, and again I will refer you to WP:ONUS which clearly states "The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.". The process of WP:BRD means that when you add something and it gets removed, you should (Before re-adding it) come here to the talk page and achieve consensus. What you are not supposed to do is keep re-adding your material so that your version is always the current one during discussions. Please wait for discussions to conclude before re-adding the material. I'm sorry if you feel that following Wikipedia policy is "nitpicky". UnequivocalAmbivalence (talk) 01:12, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Seriously cannot understand why you are being so obstinate, since you know for a fact this is no longer in dispute as it was discussed at length on the talk page...which you yourself took part https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bob_Marley#Converting_to_Christianity (there's your WP:ONUS ). The issue was resolved over there, which means it should be resolved here as well, which is why I am at a loss as to why you are insisting on going through the same ordeal here (hence "nit-picky and obstinate). If you have issues with the sources, then pick the ones you liked best from the Bob Marley article instead of childishly reverting this article. The only one who has an issue is you.Trinacrialucente (talk) 03:42, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Rudeness will not win this argument for you. They are separate discussions. That discussion related to whether the information on that page was verifiable, whit consensus determined that it was. WP:ONUS specifically states that merely being verifiable is not the sole criteria for inclusion. You need consensus on THIS instance of inclusion. Please read the policy, and contribute to the discussion without resorting to ad hominem attacks. You still have not stated your reason for wanting this piece of information included here, where it follows only a passing mention of Bob Marley and has no bearing on the statements he is being cited as having made. Explain to me why this is necessary information here on the Rastafari page, as is your obligation per WP:ONUS.UnequivocalAmbivalence (talk) 04:05, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Rastafari beung discussed now at wt:gay
Dear editors of this article, they are now discussing with me their admin lockdown to a pov version at wp:lgbt so you will know the discussion. Merry Christmas. 172.58.185.227 (talk) 17:49, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Not quite a discussion. Mainly insults and innuendo from the IP. And that's NPOV. Doug Weller  talk 21:15, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

"Haile Selassie I denied being God'
All Rastafarians know this is a lie and this blatant attack on our faith cannot stand. I feel as if certain wikipedia editors have decided on my and all the world's behalf that my personal convictions are wrong, as a Rastafari that is to say my firm conviction is that not only is His Majesty the returned Jesus Christ, but that there is nothing in His Words denying this. If wikipedia is hostile to the Rastafari viewpoint, no doubt it is hostile to Rastafari like myself having any involvement with wikipedia since we believe firmly something that certain editors have decided for us is incorrect, and no doubt they would like wikipedia to become just another platform for telling the world Rasta has been found wrong. Is is also beyond preposterous and a blatant attack opinion to say His Majesty did not encourage us because we have documentation of His extensive contacts with us as early as the 1930s. Robert the Broof (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The source is a book published by an academic press and meets our criteria at WP:RS. Do you want to suggest some sources about his contacts? Wikipedia isn't hostile or supporting of any religion, but our articles need to follow WP:NPOV and our sources. It should not state that a religion is true or, unless it's clearly a scam/hoax which yours is definitely not, state it's false. Doug Weller  talk 19:11, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Can you please explain how His Majesty's quote is interpreted as denying in any way that He is divine. That is not what the quote says at all.  The interviewer mentioned the idea that He is Jesus Christ, in His reply He mentioned that He is a man and also listed a couple of other attributes that also apply to Jesus Christ. Far from saying "I am not divine", in fact He replied by listing several attributes that also apply to Him as Jesus Christ. There are also declassified documents from the British government starting in the 1950s, showing that they tried endlessly to get HIM to issue a definite statement denying divinity for the sake of their Jamaican colony, and the correspondence shows the British ambassador in Addis found Whitehall's request entirely out of the question. When He visited Jamaica they again asked Him to repudiate the Rasta faith and He pointedly refused, saying "Who am I to disturb their faith?" Robert the Broof (talk) 19:23, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Looking again at the source I've reworded the introduction to the quote. That should help you. It would be nice to get some sources though about the British government. Doug Weller  talk 19:43, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * 1968 was a typo. But the source does not mention Jesus and we should not have that in the sentence without a source saying the interviewer said that. Doug Weller  talk 20:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * There's really no dispute about how the interview went down, there are abundant print sources and the original audio itself is easy to find, even on youtube.
 * Project 67 presents: "The Conquering Lion of Judah" A Profile Study of His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie the First, Emperor of Ethiopia. in Canada 1967 aboard the Royal train. (The first personal radio interview that Haile Selassie ever granted) Question by Bill Mc Neil: "there are millions of Christians throughout the world, your Imperial Majesty, who regard you as the reincarnation of Jesus Christ." H.M. Haile Selassie I's answer: "I have heard of that idea. I also met certain Rastafarians. I told them clearly that 'I am a man,' that 'I am Mortal,' and that 'I will be replaced by the oncoming generation, and that they should never make a mistake in assuming or pretending that a human being is emanated from a deity.'"

Narrator: "But, despite this clear declaration, millions of Ethiopians still believe that he is the reincarnation of Jesus Christ." Robert the Broof (talk) 20:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC
 * Great, but someone needs to find that source and add it. This is getting better. We can't use YouTube unless it's an official channel. Doug Weller  talk 21:08, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Reincarnation
Having just found out that Rastas believe in reincarnation, I was surprised to see no comment in the wiki, save for the reincarnation of Haile Selassie. As I'm sure there are more knowledgeable people here, does this topic deserve a heading, or at least a sentence in the doctrine section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Littlebluenick (talk • contribs) 19:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

It is not really a mainstream belief or taught much as in buddhism, apart from the messiah who can be reincarnated, the Bible talks about resurrection for regular mortals; though some would claim to be reincarnated from ancient Israelites. 172.56.2.164 (talk) 20:29, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Films as references in and of themselves
User:Midnightblueowl removed a section on films, and I was wondering if its removal was really needed. After all, a film is a published source, isn't it? --BurritoBazooka Talk Contribs  19:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * In a case like this, it would count as a primary source, i.e. a source for its own existence. Obviously that isn't ideal for the purposes of an encyclopedia. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:55, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Spiritual Use of Cannabis; Campell 110
This quote "Large scale use of ganja in Jamaica... dated from the importation of indentured Indians..." from (Campbell 110) is in the works cited. I cannot find the source this way can someone help me please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.202.28.195 (talk) 20:39, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

This article was previously a good representation of our faith where a Rastafarian like myself could read about our faith and actually recognize that it was talking about our faith.