![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hey everyone,
I noticed that there is a mention of a Pygmy people in Book 2 of Herodotus' History. He describes a story about a group of Nasamonians (an ancient North African Berber people) who crossed the Sahara and encountered short, dark-skinned people. I'll quote the relevant passage here:
"After journeying for many days over a wide extent of sand, they came at last to a plain where they observed trees growing; approaching them, and seeing fruit on them, they proceeded to gather it. While they were thus engaged, there came upon them some dwarfish men, under the middle height, who seized them and carried them off. The Nasamonians could not understand a word of their language, nor had they any acquaintance with the language of the Nasamonians. They were led across extensive marshes, and finally came to a town, where all the men were of the height of their conductors, and black-complexioned. A great river flowed by the town, running from west to east, and containing crocodiles."
I'd like to mention this in one of the articles about pygmies, either African Pygmies, Pygmy peoples or Pygmy (Greek mythology), but I'm not sure where and how to add it.
Any suggestions? — Zofthej ( talk) 14:42, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
The "Systematic discrimination" section of this article mentions that pygmies were displayed at a World's Fair in the United States in 1907. It has a citation (a website), but I don't think it's correct. The US World's Fair in 1907 seems to have been the Jamestown_Exposition, and there's nothing in there or elsewhere online about the exhibition of African pygmies. I think this is probably a mistaken reference to the 1904 World's Fair, where Ota Benga and other Africans were displayed in an exhibition. Ota Benga was also later displayed in the Bronx Zoo in 1906, which is also alluded to in that section. So I suggest updating the section to instead mention the very well-documented 1904 World's Fair, and have a wikilinked reference to the Ota Benga article. -- 2404:130:0:1000:2D8D:6456:24FC:8A10 ( talk) 05:17, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Wikiproject traditional medicine needs your help getting started. Currently there is no page for traditional Pgymy medicine, nor are medicines mentioned on the pygmy peoples page; such a page would be an excellent place to mention the alleged anti addictive properties of Ibogaine, or any of the other alleged properties of organisms and minerals traditionally used in Pygmy medicine. The projects goal is to create a pharmacopoeia that oover's the traditional medicines of all civilizations, to educate the world on the multi cultural anthropology of medicine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CensoredScribe ( talk • contribs) 00:56, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
So are pygmies in the same league of intelligence as the rest of humanity? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.204.142.109 ( talk) 19:50, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
So, you cannot really compare anyone to the 'rest of humanity', since there aren't reliable data on what intelligence said humanity has. The only two things we DO know about intelligence are that a) good nutrition and decent basic education boost average IQ a lot, b) conformist and guilt societies achieve higher averages but narrower spreads than more independent-minded individualistic societies, which get a more-Nobel-laureates-but-also-more-utter-idiots tradeoff. Aadieu ( talk) 18:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Origins
A commonly held view [citation needed] is that African Pygmies are the direct descendents of the Late Stone Age hunter-gatherer peoples of the central African rainforest...
Here's your citation, but it doesn't exactly perform the role the original author wanted the citation to perform.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Uganda
24.17.178.36 (
talk)
19:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Someone erased the portion about African pygmies with the word "weird." I restored it to the previous version. 140.247.249.71 ( talk) 22:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Under Origins, what is "honey-related"? -- Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Should someone mention this in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Platinum inc ( talk • contribs) 17:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
This section seems o be self contradictory: "...they are related to Africans..." and "...more closely related to the surrounding Asian population...". I think it's trying to say there's a distinction from Africans, but it's unclear, and the section is a stub anyway. Leushenko ( talk) 19:47, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
The claim that Australian pygmy's are not a relict of a previous wave of migration is supported by a link which is polemic in nature. There is legitimate scientific evidence that they may be a relict from a previous wave of migration and that debate should be acknowledged. https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/history-wars/2002/06/the-extinction-of-the-australian-pygmies/ 92.237.254.166 ( talk) 21:14, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
They were not "driven to extinction in the 1960s". The article referred to does not say this. It claims that the concept of the Australian "pygmies", usually called "negritos", was abandoned for political reasons. There are Australian "negritos" still living, although many have interbred with other tribes and with whites. They were certainly not driven to extinction, and this claim should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.91.9.9 ( talk) 21:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
but they were... it would be revisionistic to not say so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.112.196 ( talk) 02:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
current map has very nice detail, but you can't see the political geopgraphy or the context in terms of rest of African continent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.52.106 ( talk) 23:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm a bit concerned about the provenance of the image used on this page. It's listed as being from a 1921 cyclopedia, but is supposed to be of Professor K. G. Murphy, who wasn't born until 1908 - which would have made him at best 13 when the image was taken. He clearly isn't 13 in that image.
Professor Murphy was active in the Congo during the 1930s, and his style of dress in the image is in keeping with that period. I suspect the image has been mis-dated - in which case it may still be in copyright. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.180.52 ( talk) 10:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
The article briefly mentions pygmies in Brazil and Bolivia, but says nothing more about them. Can anybody add anything? — MiguelMunoz ( talk) 07:46, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
In the case of Bolivia, it's an error in the source article in Time magazine, there are no known ethnicities in Bolivia measuring under 5 ft tall on average. But it's kind hard to prove a negative, so it will probably stay on there for about twenty years. Isn't wikipedia great?
Boynamedsue
I read elsewhere (I don't have a reference) that pygmies around the world tend to be forest people. Is this true and does anyone have a reference? If so, it would be worthwhile to say so in the article. That may be the factor that produces convergent evolution.— MiguelMunoz ( talk) 07:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Are these people of the Homo sapiens species, or do they belong to a different species of the genus Homo, like Homo floresiensis? 72.134.97.155 ( talk) 08:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The person who first asked the question don't seem to understand the species concept. All humans alive today belong to the same species ( Homo sapiens). To me Pygmies are just a population of very short humans. They look like any Africans except being shorter on average than they neibours. They may also have lighter and more yellowish skin. The physical differences between present-day humans are very small compared to the differences between the human species living at different times. Homo floresiensis was not comparable to modern Pygmies. Members of this species where about 2/3 as tall as present Pygmy peoples. More important, the anatomy of their heads where quite unlike any humans during historic times. The heads of Homo floresiensis was most similar to those of Homo erectus which is thought to have evolved into them.
2010-12-15 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
I just merged in a large block of text from an inappropriately titled article that was up for deletion, as it seemed reasonably well sourced. It would be best if an interested editor merged and distributed the text more skillfully.— Kww( talk) 15:20, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
According to this:
Pygmies have exceptionally short life expectancy. (16-24 years on average, though I assume this varies between pygmy groups). The article suggests that this might explain their small size. I thought it worth mentioning that they die so young, even if the theory is controversial, but I have no idea how to go about including this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.185.50.202 ( talk) 15:14, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Right now it's a huge wall of text that scares off the reader. It needs paragraph breaks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.244.190.91 ( talk) 11:38, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Also contains factual errors: "Belgium colonial authorities captured and exported Pygmy children to zoos throughout Europe, including the world's fair in the United States in 1907." That's a neat trick considering there was no Belgian Congo in 1907. Not saying it didn't happen at all, however, it was most certainly not "Belgium colonial authorities" as Congo was still a free state at that time. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
75.94.225.217 (
talk)
12:08, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
What is the name of the Ethiopian pygmy tribe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duozopt ( talk • contribs) 14:04, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
"Sogenannten" is not a tribe name. It means "so-called." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.192.142.19 ( talk) 01:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Is not the definition of Pygmy peoples a little too wide? To me all dark-skinned, short peoples don't appear to form a natural group. I would only use the word Pygmy about those indigenous to Africa. These look like Black Africans except being much shorter on average. The may also have lighter, more yellowish skins. The short, dark-skinned peoples of South-East Asia I would call Negritos. (If it sounds too much like Negro the Malay term orang asli may be preferred.) They may look a bit African but their head shape is usually more similar to other East Asians. They are not quite as short as African Pygmies either. However, the most important difference is that the ancestors of the Negritos have lived in Asia for tenmillenia. Most likely they are direct descendants of the first anatomically modern humans in South-East Asia. It is also worth noting that the majority of South-East Asians today mostly descend from southern China and especially Taiwan. This island was the home of the Proto-Austronesians.
The “Pygmies” in New Guinea, Australia and South America are even less related to the African Pygmies. They are probably only tribes – or groups of tribes – which are shorter than their neighbours. If so they are just unusually short Papuans, Aborigines or Native Americans. To call these Pygmies would at best be at best misleading and at worst racist. Pleas note that races as genetically homogeneous, sharply bordered groups does not exist. What exist are genetically heterogeneous populations which gradually blend into each other. Refusing to accept variation within populations is racist to me. So is classifying a group of people as a biologically separate entity based on just a couple of traits. Empirical evidence simply don't support such ideas.
2010-11-13 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
First of all I'ld throw out the picture of "Professor K. G. Murphy" putting pressure on these pygmies, as they obviously don't like it (body language). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.201.51.20 ( talk) 22:31, 13 May 2011 (UTC) oops, unsigned...Alex Illi 196.201.51.20 ( talk) 22:39, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
What are the religious beliefs of Pygmies?-- Splashen ( talk) 05:03, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello,
I saw an article today in the journal, Science Daily, which is entitled, "Ancestors of African Pygmies and Neighboring Farmers Separated Around 60,000 Years Ago." The article can be found here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090410075110.htm. I just thought that the information contained in the article might be a nice addition to your page and certainly a good reference source.
Thank you!
70.134.190.49 ( talk) 05:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
The external link: Undated footage of Pygmy tribe constructing a vine bridge is a clip from African Pigmy Thrills (Castle Films): -- which includes this in the description: Footage from this subject is available for licensing from www.travelfilmarchive.com -- An ad for the original is ostensibly dated: Castle Films African Pygmy Thrills Movie (1942). Note however, the '42 ad includes "...FAMOUS CASTLE ADVENTURE MOVIES YOU CAN OWN!", implying ("famous") that it had been previously released (other sources date it as c.1930). Perhaps a more accurate attribution is in order? Note also that the original title is African Pigmy [sic] Thrills! The following is probably a better source: http://www.archive.org/details/african_pygmy_thrills ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 ( talk) 22:27, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
OK, so the whole article needs re-working and citations added and stuff. Particularly the "Systematic discrimination" needs a lot of work. The website at http://www1.american.edu/ted/ice/pygmy.htm does not appear to be a wonderful source, lacking in-line references. Yet it is used for three or four references.
So, my main request is to add one of those "please help fix this article up" templates at the top of the page.
41.204.74.75 ( talk) 18:06, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
{{Cleanup}}
template is probably what you're referring to. However, that template is usually most productively used when there's ongoing discussion about improvements to the article. Drive-by tagging is usually not too helpful to get things cleaned up. If you have specific ideas for how the article can be improved, feel free to re-enable the requested edit template and list them! Thanks! —
Jess·
Δ
♥
01:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)WHY DON'T YOU ASK THE REAL PEOPLE CONCERNED DIRECTLY? --> www.osapy.org / www.batwa.org They could provide a much clearer picture than any of us "outsiders" and would be glad to assist. (please add also the link www.batwa.org to the orig. wiki references) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.181.14.67 ( talk) 01:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I have made one small effort (2 details, one link) to improve the former but the latter needs even more help from an editor working on this article.
G. Robert Shiplett 20:41, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
see Africa/Relationship with other Africans/Slavery, it refers to Pygmies as 2% of the DRCs population and also a 'major ethnic group.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.2.199.74 ( talk) 00:58, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the first sentence, "Pygmy is a term used for various ethnic groups worldwide whose average height is unusually short; anthropologists define pygmy as any group whose adult men grow to less than 150 cm (59 inches) in average height," to "Pygmy is a term used for various human ethnic groups worldwide whose average height is unusually short; anthropologists define pygmy as any group whose adult men grow to less than 150 cm (59 inches) in average height" (without the emphasis). It needs to be clarified early on that pygmies are of the same species, indeed the same sub species, as other people, due to some popular misconception (of which some of the consequences are delineated later in the article). 68.50.128.91 ( talk) 11:04, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. Discussion on the point can continue without the edit request being left open. My two cents: there is one extant human species, which has no subspecies, and I don't see a pressing need to specify in the lede that pygmy people are humans—a fact that should be obvious to anyone with sufficient intelligence and education to read the article. Granted, there might be a few readers whose minds are so poisoned by prejudice that they don't think pygmies are humans, but I find it hard to believe that even the most careful wording on our part will enlighten them.
Rivertorch (
talk)
10:52, 10 January 2013 (UTC)I've marked the edit request as answered. This is an ongoing content discussion and is outwidth the 'uncontroversial changes' of the edit request system. If the IP would still like to get further input into their suggested changes, then WP:3O is the next option. Pol430 talk to me 23:00, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. Once you have established a consensus, feel free to reopen the request. Reopening the request again before a consensus has been established would be disruptive. Thanks you. -
Nathan Johnson (
talk)
17:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)I agree that the edit suggested wasn't appropriate but I have a different suggestion. In the article pygmy is used as a noun, as in "African pygmies live in several ethnic groups", and an adjective, as in "pygmy peoples". It is also, I think, being used as a noun meaning "pygmy group", as in "the Pygmy have always been viewed". Why not change "Pygmy is a term used for various ethnic groups worldwide" to "Pygmy is a term used for people from various ethnic groups worldwide"? Thincat ( talk) 17:52, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Question: So can the edit semi protected template be marked as answered?
Callanecc (
talk •
contribs •
logs)
03:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
"The best-known pygmy peoples are the Aka, Efé and Mbuti of Central Africa" The sentence is a problem. What does it mean? Clearly a problem fix it and stop pointless reverting. The lead should discuss the pygmy people and who go by that name. It is not only the Aka and Efe that are the best known? Known to who? Is it a citation needed NO!. As far as I know the Baka are the ones you always see on TV. either way the sentence can be improved to be more functional. "best known" very strange to challenge this Pygmie people The correct configuration is to say the term is commonly applied to people of C Africa, and then give some examples. Hence the word "Such As list". Only collaboration develops a page. -- Inayity ( talk) 08:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
because in a section on systematic discrimination (that covers how they were abducted and put in zoos, no less!), "habitat" implies animal too strongly for comfort. Angel ( talk) 07:50, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Simple grammar change:
Bungeloe ( talk) 22:41, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Done -
Arjayay (
talk)
07:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I have removed the following text from the Slavery section (which was retitled Slavery/Coustum) as being unreferenced POV-pushing:
Instagram @kylonking
For editors interested, there's an RfC currently being held: Should sections on genetics be removed from pages on ethnic groups?. As this will almost certainly result in the removal of the "Genetic evidence for origins" section from this article, I'd encourage any contributors to voice their opinions there. -- Katangais (talk) 20:04, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
the article makes clear that large percentages have been killed off, but is there also some percentage that have taller offspring now that they are living in cities and eating more varied diets?
if the condition is at root a vitamin D deficiency or somesuch, wouldn't they grow to "standard" height in 2-3 generations?
other races seem to be growing an inch or two per generation; is there some comparable number -- "5-6 inches", say -- for modern pygmies? 209.172.23.132 ( talk) 04:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
The article refers to someone named "Seshardi". It should be "Seshadri". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grammar police and thieves ( talk • contribs) 01:52, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi all,
I have
declined a request that this page be moved to
Pygmy. My rationale for this was simply that had not been discussed on the article talk page, and so did not meet the "it is holding up a page move that is non-controversial or consensual, for instance reversing a redirect, or removing a disambiguation page that only points to a single link"
WP:G6 criterion.
Pete AU aka --
Shirt58 (
talk)
08:29, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Pygmy peoples. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:07, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Add a List of Famous Pygmy People. Jidanni ( talk) 16:47, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
This is very confusing; how is it that these people were supposedly documented in the mid 20th century but also supposedly didn't actually exist? The current revision is not very helpful. It says "The belief that there were pygmy people in northern Queensland.... This theory has become known as the Barrinean hypothesis and the Trihybrid Model of migration...." It appears to be saying that Birdsell's Trihybrid Model is a theory about the existence of pygmies in Queensland! It then cites various authorities against this model, which is all tangential to the article. Only one citation seems to actually address whether the aboriginal people of that part of Queensland were distinctively short, the article "Who we should recognise as First Australians in the constitution?", in which there is a single relevant sentence which cites "The Extinction of Rigour: A Comment on 'The Extinction of the Australian Pygmies' by Keith Windschuttle and Tim Gillin". I don't have access to that article - what does it actually say? It would also be nice to know what Tinsdale and Birdsell originally said rather than a second-hand account in a popular article.
The current revision quotes McAllister's book as saying "Barrinean people are not an outpost of Pygmonia". This needs some context - what the heck does Pygmonia mean? I could only find a blurb for the book, which says "A recent chapter in the history wars has returned a colonial-era mystery to the limelight- the existence of several tribes of Pygmy Aboriginal peoples in the Cairns and Yarrabah Peninsula regions in Queensland. Despite a general belief in their extinction, their descendants still live around Cairns, as archaeologist Peter McAllister found on a recent research trip". This makes it sound like he thinks they *were* 'pygmies'. Megalophias ( talk) 03:03, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
The article "the extinction of rigour" can be found in full here: https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p73931/pdf/book.pdf The section on Australian 'Pygmies' gives disproportionate weight to an extreme minority view that is strongly associated with racist and far-right-wing political movements in Australia. If the article were weighted according to the scientific and anthropological consensus there would be four paragraphs explaining why there was no distinct "pygmy" race and two sentences claiming that there was, instead of the current ratio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by James Haughton ( talk • contribs) 12:07, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Metropolising ( talk) 11:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Asantes who became part of the present day Ghana are also pygmies. The Asantes belong to the ethnic group called Akans.
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hey everyone,
I noticed that there is a mention of a Pygmy people in Book 2 of Herodotus' History. He describes a story about a group of Nasamonians (an ancient North African Berber people) who crossed the Sahara and encountered short, dark-skinned people. I'll quote the relevant passage here:
"After journeying for many days over a wide extent of sand, they came at last to a plain where they observed trees growing; approaching them, and seeing fruit on them, they proceeded to gather it. While they were thus engaged, there came upon them some dwarfish men, under the middle height, who seized them and carried them off. The Nasamonians could not understand a word of their language, nor had they any acquaintance with the language of the Nasamonians. They were led across extensive marshes, and finally came to a town, where all the men were of the height of their conductors, and black-complexioned. A great river flowed by the town, running from west to east, and containing crocodiles."
I'd like to mention this in one of the articles about pygmies, either African Pygmies, Pygmy peoples or Pygmy (Greek mythology), but I'm not sure where and how to add it.
Any suggestions? — Zofthej ( talk) 14:42, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
The "Systematic discrimination" section of this article mentions that pygmies were displayed at a World's Fair in the United States in 1907. It has a citation (a website), but I don't think it's correct. The US World's Fair in 1907 seems to have been the Jamestown_Exposition, and there's nothing in there or elsewhere online about the exhibition of African pygmies. I think this is probably a mistaken reference to the 1904 World's Fair, where Ota Benga and other Africans were displayed in an exhibition. Ota Benga was also later displayed in the Bronx Zoo in 1906, which is also alluded to in that section. So I suggest updating the section to instead mention the very well-documented 1904 World's Fair, and have a wikilinked reference to the Ota Benga article. -- 2404:130:0:1000:2D8D:6456:24FC:8A10 ( talk) 05:17, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Wikiproject traditional medicine needs your help getting started. Currently there is no page for traditional Pgymy medicine, nor are medicines mentioned on the pygmy peoples page; such a page would be an excellent place to mention the alleged anti addictive properties of Ibogaine, or any of the other alleged properties of organisms and minerals traditionally used in Pygmy medicine. The projects goal is to create a pharmacopoeia that oover's the traditional medicines of all civilizations, to educate the world on the multi cultural anthropology of medicine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CensoredScribe ( talk • contribs) 00:56, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
So are pygmies in the same league of intelligence as the rest of humanity? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.204.142.109 ( talk) 19:50, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
So, you cannot really compare anyone to the 'rest of humanity', since there aren't reliable data on what intelligence said humanity has. The only two things we DO know about intelligence are that a) good nutrition and decent basic education boost average IQ a lot, b) conformist and guilt societies achieve higher averages but narrower spreads than more independent-minded individualistic societies, which get a more-Nobel-laureates-but-also-more-utter-idiots tradeoff. Aadieu ( talk) 18:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Origins
A commonly held view [citation needed] is that African Pygmies are the direct descendents of the Late Stone Age hunter-gatherer peoples of the central African rainforest...
Here's your citation, but it doesn't exactly perform the role the original author wanted the citation to perform.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Uganda
24.17.178.36 (
talk)
19:49, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Someone erased the portion about African pygmies with the word "weird." I restored it to the previous version. 140.247.249.71 ( talk) 22:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Under Origins, what is "honey-related"? -- Gadget850 ( Ed) 18:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Should someone mention this in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Platinum inc ( talk • contribs) 17:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
This section seems o be self contradictory: "...they are related to Africans..." and "...more closely related to the surrounding Asian population...". I think it's trying to say there's a distinction from Africans, but it's unclear, and the section is a stub anyway. Leushenko ( talk) 19:47, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
The claim that Australian pygmy's are not a relict of a previous wave of migration is supported by a link which is polemic in nature. There is legitimate scientific evidence that they may be a relict from a previous wave of migration and that debate should be acknowledged. https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/history-wars/2002/06/the-extinction-of-the-australian-pygmies/ 92.237.254.166 ( talk) 21:14, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
They were not "driven to extinction in the 1960s". The article referred to does not say this. It claims that the concept of the Australian "pygmies", usually called "negritos", was abandoned for political reasons. There are Australian "negritos" still living, although many have interbred with other tribes and with whites. They were certainly not driven to extinction, and this claim should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.91.9.9 ( talk) 21:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
but they were... it would be revisionistic to not say so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.112.196 ( talk) 02:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
current map has very nice detail, but you can't see the political geopgraphy or the context in terms of rest of African continent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.52.106 ( talk) 23:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm a bit concerned about the provenance of the image used on this page. It's listed as being from a 1921 cyclopedia, but is supposed to be of Professor K. G. Murphy, who wasn't born until 1908 - which would have made him at best 13 when the image was taken. He clearly isn't 13 in that image.
Professor Murphy was active in the Congo during the 1930s, and his style of dress in the image is in keeping with that period. I suspect the image has been mis-dated - in which case it may still be in copyright. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.180.52 ( talk) 10:59, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
The article briefly mentions pygmies in Brazil and Bolivia, but says nothing more about them. Can anybody add anything? — MiguelMunoz ( talk) 07:46, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
In the case of Bolivia, it's an error in the source article in Time magazine, there are no known ethnicities in Bolivia measuring under 5 ft tall on average. But it's kind hard to prove a negative, so it will probably stay on there for about twenty years. Isn't wikipedia great?
Boynamedsue
I read elsewhere (I don't have a reference) that pygmies around the world tend to be forest people. Is this true and does anyone have a reference? If so, it would be worthwhile to say so in the article. That may be the factor that produces convergent evolution.— MiguelMunoz ( talk) 07:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Are these people of the Homo sapiens species, or do they belong to a different species of the genus Homo, like Homo floresiensis? 72.134.97.155 ( talk) 08:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
The person who first asked the question don't seem to understand the species concept. All humans alive today belong to the same species ( Homo sapiens). To me Pygmies are just a population of very short humans. They look like any Africans except being shorter on average than they neibours. They may also have lighter and more yellowish skin. The physical differences between present-day humans are very small compared to the differences between the human species living at different times. Homo floresiensis was not comparable to modern Pygmies. Members of this species where about 2/3 as tall as present Pygmy peoples. More important, the anatomy of their heads where quite unlike any humans during historic times. The heads of Homo floresiensis was most similar to those of Homo erectus which is thought to have evolved into them.
2010-12-15 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
I just merged in a large block of text from an inappropriately titled article that was up for deletion, as it seemed reasonably well sourced. It would be best if an interested editor merged and distributed the text more skillfully.— Kww( talk) 15:20, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
According to this:
Pygmies have exceptionally short life expectancy. (16-24 years on average, though I assume this varies between pygmy groups). The article suggests that this might explain their small size. I thought it worth mentioning that they die so young, even if the theory is controversial, but I have no idea how to go about including this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.185.50.202 ( talk) 15:14, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Right now it's a huge wall of text that scares off the reader. It needs paragraph breaks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.244.190.91 ( talk) 11:38, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
Also contains factual errors: "Belgium colonial authorities captured and exported Pygmy children to zoos throughout Europe, including the world's fair in the United States in 1907." That's a neat trick considering there was no Belgian Congo in 1907. Not saying it didn't happen at all, however, it was most certainly not "Belgium colonial authorities" as Congo was still a free state at that time. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
75.94.225.217 (
talk)
12:08, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
What is the name of the Ethiopian pygmy tribe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duozopt ( talk • contribs) 14:04, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
"Sogenannten" is not a tribe name. It means "so-called." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.192.142.19 ( talk) 01:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Is not the definition of Pygmy peoples a little too wide? To me all dark-skinned, short peoples don't appear to form a natural group. I would only use the word Pygmy about those indigenous to Africa. These look like Black Africans except being much shorter on average. The may also have lighter, more yellowish skins. The short, dark-skinned peoples of South-East Asia I would call Negritos. (If it sounds too much like Negro the Malay term orang asli may be preferred.) They may look a bit African but their head shape is usually more similar to other East Asians. They are not quite as short as African Pygmies either. However, the most important difference is that the ancestors of the Negritos have lived in Asia for tenmillenia. Most likely they are direct descendants of the first anatomically modern humans in South-East Asia. It is also worth noting that the majority of South-East Asians today mostly descend from southern China and especially Taiwan. This island was the home of the Proto-Austronesians.
The “Pygmies” in New Guinea, Australia and South America are even less related to the African Pygmies. They are probably only tribes – or groups of tribes – which are shorter than their neighbours. If so they are just unusually short Papuans, Aborigines or Native Americans. To call these Pygmies would at best be at best misleading and at worst racist. Pleas note that races as genetically homogeneous, sharply bordered groups does not exist. What exist are genetically heterogeneous populations which gradually blend into each other. Refusing to accept variation within populations is racist to me. So is classifying a group of people as a biologically separate entity based on just a couple of traits. Empirical evidence simply don't support such ideas.
2010-11-13 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.
First of all I'ld throw out the picture of "Professor K. G. Murphy" putting pressure on these pygmies, as they obviously don't like it (body language). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.201.51.20 ( talk) 22:31, 13 May 2011 (UTC) oops, unsigned...Alex Illi 196.201.51.20 ( talk) 22:39, 13 May 2011 (UTC)
What are the religious beliefs of Pygmies?-- Splashen ( talk) 05:03, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Hello,
I saw an article today in the journal, Science Daily, which is entitled, "Ancestors of African Pygmies and Neighboring Farmers Separated Around 60,000 Years Ago." The article can be found here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090410075110.htm. I just thought that the information contained in the article might be a nice addition to your page and certainly a good reference source.
Thank you!
70.134.190.49 ( talk) 05:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
The external link: Undated footage of Pygmy tribe constructing a vine bridge is a clip from African Pigmy Thrills (Castle Films): -- which includes this in the description: Footage from this subject is available for licensing from www.travelfilmarchive.com -- An ad for the original is ostensibly dated: Castle Films African Pygmy Thrills Movie (1942). Note however, the '42 ad includes "...FAMOUS CASTLE ADVENTURE MOVIES YOU CAN OWN!", implying ("famous") that it had been previously released (other sources date it as c.1930). Perhaps a more accurate attribution is in order? Note also that the original title is African Pigmy [sic] Thrills! The following is probably a better source: http://www.archive.org/details/african_pygmy_thrills ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 ( talk) 22:27, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
OK, so the whole article needs re-working and citations added and stuff. Particularly the "Systematic discrimination" needs a lot of work. The website at http://www1.american.edu/ted/ice/pygmy.htm does not appear to be a wonderful source, lacking in-line references. Yet it is used for three or four references.
So, my main request is to add one of those "please help fix this article up" templates at the top of the page.
41.204.74.75 ( talk) 18:06, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
{{Cleanup}}
template is probably what you're referring to. However, that template is usually most productively used when there's ongoing discussion about improvements to the article. Drive-by tagging is usually not too helpful to get things cleaned up. If you have specific ideas for how the article can be improved, feel free to re-enable the requested edit template and list them! Thanks! —
Jess·
Δ
♥
01:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)WHY DON'T YOU ASK THE REAL PEOPLE CONCERNED DIRECTLY? --> www.osapy.org / www.batwa.org They could provide a much clearer picture than any of us "outsiders" and would be glad to assist. (please add also the link www.batwa.org to the orig. wiki references) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.181.14.67 ( talk) 01:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I have made one small effort (2 details, one link) to improve the former but the latter needs even more help from an editor working on this article.
G. Robert Shiplett 20:41, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
see Africa/Relationship with other Africans/Slavery, it refers to Pygmies as 2% of the DRCs population and also a 'major ethnic group.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.2.199.74 ( talk) 00:58, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change the first sentence, "Pygmy is a term used for various ethnic groups worldwide whose average height is unusually short; anthropologists define pygmy as any group whose adult men grow to less than 150 cm (59 inches) in average height," to "Pygmy is a term used for various human ethnic groups worldwide whose average height is unusually short; anthropologists define pygmy as any group whose adult men grow to less than 150 cm (59 inches) in average height" (without the emphasis). It needs to be clarified early on that pygmies are of the same species, indeed the same sub species, as other people, due to some popular misconception (of which some of the consequences are delineated later in the article). 68.50.128.91 ( talk) 11:04, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. Discussion on the point can continue without the edit request being left open. My two cents: there is one extant human species, which has no subspecies, and I don't see a pressing need to specify in the lede that pygmy people are humans—a fact that should be obvious to anyone with sufficient intelligence and education to read the article. Granted, there might be a few readers whose minds are so poisoned by prejudice that they don't think pygmies are humans, but I find it hard to believe that even the most careful wording on our part will enlighten them.
Rivertorch (
talk)
10:52, 10 January 2013 (UTC)I've marked the edit request as answered. This is an ongoing content discussion and is outwidth the 'uncontroversial changes' of the edit request system. If the IP would still like to get further input into their suggested changes, then WP:3O is the next option. Pol430 talk to me 23:00, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. Once you have established a consensus, feel free to reopen the request. Reopening the request again before a consensus has been established would be disruptive. Thanks you. -
Nathan Johnson (
talk)
17:02, 20 January 2013 (UTC)I agree that the edit suggested wasn't appropriate but I have a different suggestion. In the article pygmy is used as a noun, as in "African pygmies live in several ethnic groups", and an adjective, as in "pygmy peoples". It is also, I think, being used as a noun meaning "pygmy group", as in "the Pygmy have always been viewed". Why not change "Pygmy is a term used for various ethnic groups worldwide" to "Pygmy is a term used for people from various ethnic groups worldwide"? Thincat ( talk) 17:52, 20 January 2013 (UTC)
Question: So can the edit semi protected template be marked as answered?
Callanecc (
talk •
contribs •
logs)
03:44, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
"The best-known pygmy peoples are the Aka, Efé and Mbuti of Central Africa" The sentence is a problem. What does it mean? Clearly a problem fix it and stop pointless reverting. The lead should discuss the pygmy people and who go by that name. It is not only the Aka and Efe that are the best known? Known to who? Is it a citation needed NO!. As far as I know the Baka are the ones you always see on TV. either way the sentence can be improved to be more functional. "best known" very strange to challenge this Pygmie people The correct configuration is to say the term is commonly applied to people of C Africa, and then give some examples. Hence the word "Such As list". Only collaboration develops a page. -- Inayity ( talk) 08:47, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
because in a section on systematic discrimination (that covers how they were abducted and put in zoos, no less!), "habitat" implies animal too strongly for comfort. Angel ( talk) 07:50, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Simple grammar change:
Bungeloe ( talk) 22:41, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Done -
Arjayay (
talk)
07:59, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
I have removed the following text from the Slavery section (which was retitled Slavery/Coustum) as being unreferenced POV-pushing:
Instagram @kylonking
For editors interested, there's an RfC currently being held: Should sections on genetics be removed from pages on ethnic groups?. As this will almost certainly result in the removal of the "Genetic evidence for origins" section from this article, I'd encourage any contributors to voice their opinions there. -- Katangais (talk) 20:04, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
the article makes clear that large percentages have been killed off, but is there also some percentage that have taller offspring now that they are living in cities and eating more varied diets?
if the condition is at root a vitamin D deficiency or somesuch, wouldn't they grow to "standard" height in 2-3 generations?
other races seem to be growing an inch or two per generation; is there some comparable number -- "5-6 inches", say -- for modern pygmies? 209.172.23.132 ( talk) 04:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
The article refers to someone named "Seshardi". It should be "Seshadri". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grammar police and thieves ( talk • contribs) 01:52, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi all,
I have
declined a request that this page be moved to
Pygmy. My rationale for this was simply that had not been discussed on the article talk page, and so did not meet the "it is holding up a page move that is non-controversial or consensual, for instance reversing a redirect, or removing a disambiguation page that only points to a single link"
WP:G6 criterion.
Pete AU aka --
Shirt58 (
talk)
08:29, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Pygmy peoples. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:07, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
Add a List of Famous Pygmy People. Jidanni ( talk) 16:47, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
This is very confusing; how is it that these people were supposedly documented in the mid 20th century but also supposedly didn't actually exist? The current revision is not very helpful. It says "The belief that there were pygmy people in northern Queensland.... This theory has become known as the Barrinean hypothesis and the Trihybrid Model of migration...." It appears to be saying that Birdsell's Trihybrid Model is a theory about the existence of pygmies in Queensland! It then cites various authorities against this model, which is all tangential to the article. Only one citation seems to actually address whether the aboriginal people of that part of Queensland were distinctively short, the article "Who we should recognise as First Australians in the constitution?", in which there is a single relevant sentence which cites "The Extinction of Rigour: A Comment on 'The Extinction of the Australian Pygmies' by Keith Windschuttle and Tim Gillin". I don't have access to that article - what does it actually say? It would also be nice to know what Tinsdale and Birdsell originally said rather than a second-hand account in a popular article.
The current revision quotes McAllister's book as saying "Barrinean people are not an outpost of Pygmonia". This needs some context - what the heck does Pygmonia mean? I could only find a blurb for the book, which says "A recent chapter in the history wars has returned a colonial-era mystery to the limelight- the existence of several tribes of Pygmy Aboriginal peoples in the Cairns and Yarrabah Peninsula regions in Queensland. Despite a general belief in their extinction, their descendants still live around Cairns, as archaeologist Peter McAllister found on a recent research trip". This makes it sound like he thinks they *were* 'pygmies'. Megalophias ( talk) 03:03, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
The article "the extinction of rigour" can be found in full here: https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p73931/pdf/book.pdf The section on Australian 'Pygmies' gives disproportionate weight to an extreme minority view that is strongly associated with racist and far-right-wing political movements in Australia. If the article were weighted according to the scientific and anthropological consensus there would be four paragraphs explaining why there was no distinct "pygmy" race and two sentences claiming that there was, instead of the current ratio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by James Haughton ( talk • contribs) 12:07, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Metropolising ( talk) 11:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Asantes who became part of the present day Ghana are also pygmies. The Asantes belong to the ethnic group called Akans.