This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Haiti article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on January 1, 2013, January 1, 2014, and January 1, 2015.

This   level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Caribbean Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Haiti Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Haiti, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Haiti-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HaitiWikipedia:WikiProject HaitiTemplate:WikiProject HaitiHaiti articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Countries This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CountriesWikipedia:WikiProject CountriesTemplate:WikiProject Countriescountry articles WikiProject Countries to-do list: history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Check out the article alerts; see if anything catches your fancy. Cleanup : clean-up listing for Countries Stubs : de-stub articles in Category:Stubs by region. Other : add {{ WPCountries}} to talk pages of related articles, and assess. African diaspora High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2010, when it received 8,760,000 views.

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: July 4 to 10, 2021

The "Bus Service" section doesn't make any sense and I can't edit it as I don't understand what the writer is trying to say. Also, the whole section has been copied word for word from Haiti Libre (see link in the section. An example of the section:

Under the metal body of "The Haitian pride," a 300-hp diesel engine and chassis doubled. And, for better visibility, a rear view camera for the controls of driver. Manufactured from the assembly of parts purchased abroad, the bus is equipped with, among other things with, televisions, sound system, custom lamps, window laminated four whose four for exit, sanitary facilities, 54 individual reclining seats, to ensure relaxation, security and comfort of travelers.

Can anyone help with this?

Ellie - 86.130.60.63 14:16, 12 February 2014‎

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Haiti Product Exports (2019).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 15:05, 23 March 2023 (UTC) reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

gainst = against 2603:8000:D300:D0F:2931:A6A7:3D47:5C8E ( talk) 03:24, 5 May 2023 (UTC) reply

 Done Dawnseeker2000 03:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Vinland - settled by the Norse - was to my knowledge the first time Europeans settled (built housing) in the Americas. I suggest it should be changed to “the first successful (this is up to debate) European settlement…” 2A00:23EE:2210:4E39:A52D:50DF:4C66:B01D ( talk) 19:19, 28 May 2023 (UTC) reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Beginning of the third paragraph, "maroons" has an existing page that is not linked to. This is the first instance of the term in the article.

Change

"In the midst of the French Revolution (1789–99), slaves, maroons, and free people of color"

to

"In the midst of the French Revolution (1789–99), slaves, maroons, and free people of color" Mark20044 ( talk) 16:30, 5 October 2023 (UTC) reply

 Done — TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh) 00:05, 6 October 2023 (UTC) reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Section: "French rule (1625–1804)", last paragraph.

Change "Maroons" to "maroons". The existing article, as well as the other source below, do not treat the term as a proper noun so it should not be capitalized.

Additionally, the citation for the term is out of date; the Encyclopaedia Britannica article on Haiti does not use the term. Suggest changing it to the page on the maroon community: https://www.britannica.com/topic/maroon-community Mark20044 ( talk) 16:47, 5 October 2023 (UTC) reply

• Creating a new section as this is essentially a different edit request. — TechnoSquirrel69 ( sigh) 00:02, 6 October 2023 (UTC) reply

 Done Pinchme123 ( talk) 13:59, 6 October 2023 (UTC) reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I would like to change the word "slaves" to "enslaved people" QueeneAllie ( talk) 14:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

 Done for now: I've made the change for sensitivity purposes, and it should remain unless anyone else disagrees. I wonder if there's a policy for these types of word changes, as I see them quite frequently in various contexts. Thanks for the contribution!
— Urro ^{talk edits} ⋮ 15:03, 12 March 2024 (UTC) reply

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Michel Patrick Boisvert is acting prime minister.

^[1]

207.96.32.81 ( talk) 01:29, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

 Done Jamedeus ( talk) 02:19, 13 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Should me mention "None" as a de-facto government? - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 19:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Even for states that have been in practical anarchy, usually the de facto government is referred to as "transitional" or "provisional." More rarely, I've seen "disputed" used in place of any government when another political body claims legitimacy (see Libya c. 2011). Clyde H. Mapping ( talk) 22:25, 16 March 2024 (UTC) reply

A Failed state is being talked about by academics.

Forsans, Nicolas (2024-03-13). "How Haiti became a failed state". The Conversation. Retrieved 2024-03-17. Moxy🍁 04:15, 17 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Yeah, but the last I've heard is that no transitional or provisional government has been formed yet. At the very least we should go with the "disputed" option. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 14:00, 18 March 2024 (UTC) reply

You may begin Rambling Rambler as per your WP:ONUS request on why my recent edits backed by citations need to be excluded given the fact that it is based on current events suitable for a WP:LEAD (as well as subtly addressing the spiraling “Cannibal” misinformation that is taking social-media by storm by some pretty well-known media personalities that I will not name or haven’t you noticed?). It was written in conjunction with the current political climate and organizations involved in an insurgence in Haiti and was in no way meant to be trivial. Savvyjack23 ( talk) 23:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Furthermore Rambling Rambler, WP:ONUS under the subsection “other issues”, has been open to interpretation in my 11-year experience, where it mentions that, “The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content.” —Please keep in mind that you are all but one single editor in dispute of these recent edits. Savvyjack23 ( talk) 23:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC) reply

First off, WP:ONUS clearly states: "The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content," (emphasis mine) so repeatedly reintroducing it along with hitting me with an edit-warring template very much doesn't look like you're wanting to actually discuss this in good faith. You are the person seeking to include the content here, not myself, and it is not open to interpretation.

Quite simply, just because something is verifiable doesn't guarantee inclusion, and placing multiple paragraphs about social media rumours (true or false) about a specific Haitian individual/group related to recent unrest in the country (which has its own article) in the lead for the main Haiti article itself is very much in breach of WP:UNDUE as it is an unreasonable level of prominence. Inclusion in articles on the group it pertains to would more likely be fitting and therefore find consensus given the relevance to the article subject. But placing it so prominently here is the equivalent of say opening the article for United States and the first thing you see being two paragraphs detailing January 6th. Rambling Rambler ( talk) 23:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Article not the place for speculation. Moxy🍁 00:20, 19 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Agreed. As I mentioned at the 3RR noticeboard, I agree with Rambling Rambler that the material added was undue for the lead.  —  Amakuru ( talk) 01:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Most of it seems undue for the body too, being more about American media than Haiti. The bit of information might be useful in Government and Politics, which is an entirely undeveloped section. CMD ( talk) 01:38, 19 March 2024 (UTC) reply

It's mostly about myths that have been debunked, or things that there is no evidence for. There's no point in mentioning it. Richard75 ( talk) 23:37, 19 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Rambling Rambler, on the surface, there would seem to be a conflict between WP:ONUS and WP:REMOVAL, however the latter may offer some clarity as it states, “There are various reasons for removing content from an article. Regardless of the reason, it should be described in the edit summary If there is any doubt the removal may be controversial, or if it has been restored following a previous removal, it should be discussed on the page's talk page prior to removal”. —-Again, you were the sole editor at the time of dispute and WP:ONUS called for “those” [editors] (which is not singular language). This is why I believed that this guideline was subjective and open for interpretation. It would seem that content removal before discussion was not proper protocol like I initially had thought.

With that being said, I am glad we had reached a consensus; though should the entirety of my edits be removed? Should I reiterate them here? cc: Richard75, Chipmunkdavis, Amakuru, Moxy. Thanks. Savvyjack23 ( talk) 03:28, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

I don't get why you're trying to revive this after a month of inactivity.

WP:ONUS is a policy, WP:REMOVAL is an essay of someone's view. The language used in ONUS is simply neutral language so it applies to a group of any size (there is no requirement of multiple editors having to dispute it). A single editor disputing your edits when no positive consensus has been established for the content, it's on you to take it to talk and obtain that consensus, it's not acceptable to just endlessly reinsert the content you demanded be included.

Also, just to highlight for the record, you took no part in the consensus building process despite it being expected, instead you tried to resist following policy and then made a clearly bad faith report to the edit-warring noticeboard you knew was bogus [1] so I suggest you drop it. Rambling Rambler ( talk) 10:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

How did I take part in no consensus when I had initially opposed the removal and initiated the discussion? A discussion which hasn’t been formally closed yet mind you; so there is no reviving being taken place here. If you have anything personal you’ll like to say to me (unrelated to this article pertaining to Haiti), we can do it on either one of our talk pages. Though, I do not respond to WP:PA under the guise of “suggestions” that I ought to keep; bear that in mind Rambling Rambler. Savvyjack23 ( talk) 20:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply

It's very glass houses for you to expect others to take discussions on your personal actions to personal talk pages when your reviving of this discussion is mostly personal commentary about your misunderstanding of policy and not about the content of the Haiti article.

Now, it's not a "personal attack" to bring up the factual information that almost immediately after belatedly starting this talkpage discussion (after previously just re-adding the disputed content against policy) you didn't interact with my response but instead knowingly made a false 3RR edit-warring report against me. Rather for at least myself it's relevant contextual information when considering why you've suddenly come back weeks later when combined with:

1. How you actively chose not to engage in the discussion as multiple other editors spoke against your desired changes (your contribution history shows consistent active editing elsewhere on the site during this timeframe), and
2. How you're not presenting any substantial new information at this time that would warrant a new discussion but instead are just asking people to change their minds based on the exact same information from several weeks ago.

Overall it makes it hard to understand what you're looking to get out of this, other than five people once again just making it clear to you that it's undue. Rambling Rambler ( talk) 21:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC) reply