Content deleted Content added
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 5 WikiProject templates. (Fix Category:Pages using WikiProject banner shell with unknown parameters) Tag: |
|||
| (29 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|listas=Jefferson-Hemings controversy|blp=no|1=
{{WikiProject United States
{{WikiProject Virginia
{{WikiProject Biography
{{WikiProject
{{WikiProject
}}
{{oldpeerreview|archive=1}}
Line 19 ⟶ 13:
The 30 year age difference between Sally Hemings and Jefferson should be noted somewhere. Also the fact that the sexual relationship started when she was in her early teens and he was in his 40's. - [[User:Pearl2525|Pearl2525]] ([[User talk:Pearl2525|talk]]) 06:44, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
==Eston Hemings' name==
Line 28 ⟶ 21:
:There is a separate article on [[Haplogroup T (Y-DNA)]], which is the appropriate place for the technical discussion. [[User:Parkwells|Parkwells]] ([[User talk:Parkwells|talk]]) 00:46, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Shouldn’t there be a link to that DNA article in this article, since Jefferson is specifically mentioned there?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_T-M184 <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/2601:645:4300:EE90:696F:4CE6:6CA9:F33A|2601:645:4300:EE90:696F:4CE6:6CA9:F33A]] ([[User talk:2601:645:4300:EE90:696F:4CE6:6CA9:F33A#top|talk]]) 06:03, 18 December 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
==Article title==
Line 308 ⟶ 305:
[[User:Younggoldchip|Younggoldchip]] ([[User talk:Younggoldchip|talk]]) 18:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
:"had the chromosomal rarity carried by Jefferson males" It is not rare, just unusual in the United States. Jefferson males were found to belong to [[Haplogroup T-M184]]. It is relatively common in the [[Levant]] and various areas of [[East Africa]], but represents a minority of the population in [[Southern Europe]] and is exceedingly rare in the rest of Europe. [[User:Dimadick|Dimadick]] ([[User talk:Dimadick|talk]]) 08:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
== Use of was ==
I think that we should change the past tense format of the article regarding the debate because this issue is still debated, mostly by Jefferson defenders. It’s worth noting that Monticello itself has come under fire from more conservative groups for focusing many of its exhibits on slavery and Sally Hemings, that might be worth also adding in tue article to an extent. These are just my thoughts. [[User:Dancingtudorqueen|Dancingtudorqueen]] ([[User talk:Dancingtudorqueen|talk]]) 07:28, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
== Serious pro-paternity lead section/article bias ==
I find the lead section to be very biased in favor of the pro-paternity side, with nothing stating the contrary aside from a dismissal of past-held ("racist") consensus in regards to the anti-paternity historians/geneticists. I also think that there are a lot of problems with using sources like the New York Times and the Washington Post, who have an evident left-leaning political bias, particularly after the Great Awokening. The same can be said for the History departments of prestigious US universities like the Ivy Leagues and the UCs. I would probably even say that the article as a whole is very pro-paternity and the article reads like it was written in 2012. [[User:Yourlocallordandsavior|Yourlocallordandsavior]] ([[User talk:Yourlocallordandsavior|talk]]) 01:20, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
:I would however admit that it is unfortunate to see that the pro/anti-paternity sides to this argument are largely broken via partisan lines. [[User:Yourlocallordandsavior|Yourlocallordandsavior]] ([[User talk:Yourlocallordandsavior|talk]]) 08:58, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:: I’m sorry, but it’s difficult to take anything you say about this seriously when you’re throwing around terms like “the Great Awokening,” especially when you’re using it to discredit academic institutions. —[[User:GeraldineSeinfeld|GeraldineSeinfeld]] ([[User talk:GeraldineSeinfeld|talk]]) 13:42, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:Regardless of whether or not you personally have faith in the New York Times and Ivy League historians, they are considered reliable sources on Wikipedia.
:Furthermore, the non-paternity argument you are shopping shifts the contemporary critique of Jefferson from "rapist of teenager" to "pimp who tolerated or encouraged his relatives to rape a teenager so that he could benefit financially from potentially selling her children on the speculative slaves-as-commodities market." By all means expand the article wherever the truth leads you, just make sure to include citations with page numbers. Cheers.
:[[User:Jengod|jengod]] ([[User talk:Jengod|talk]]) 14:49, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::from "rapist of teenager" to "pimp"..." One does not necessarily contradict the other. Jefferson could be getting pleasure from rapes, but that would not stop him from seeking profit from prostitution. And since slavery was involved, no consent was necessary by either Hemings or any other slave who was impregnated to benefit her master's pockets. [[User:Dimadick|Dimadick]] ([[User talk:Dimadick|talk]]) 16:58, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Indeed. This may be more applicable to the era after the transatlantic slave trade closed but nonetheless: "According to [[Frederic Bancroft]] in ''[[Slave-Trading in the Old South]]'', young female slaves were also considered an excellent financial investment: 'Not only real estate, but also stocks, bonds and all other personal property were little prized in comparison with slaves...Absurd as it now seems, slaves, especially girls and young women, because of prospective increase, were considered the best investment for persons of small means.'" (page 343) [[User:Jengod|jengod]] ([[User talk:Jengod|talk]]) 17:16, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
:We already have an entire section on the minority viewpoint. Further expansion of it is unnecessary relative to the level of acceptance and coverage the viewpoint has received. [[User:VQuakr|VQuakr]] ([[User talk:VQuakr|talk]]) 05:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
== 1999 Monticello minority report ==
In [[Special:Diff/1209855675]], [[User:DrKC MD]] added a section on the [https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/research-report-on-jefferson-and-hemings/minority-report-of-the-monticello-research-committee-on-thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings/ 1999 minority report] of the Monticello Research Committee on Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings. The section had several issues:
# It was out-of-place and didn't fit well within the flow of the article.
# It had excessive detail on debates that happened many years ago. I think this single-author document from 1999 is better treated as primary source material for historians of this historical controversy rather than as a reliable source for notable claims of truth in the present. [[User:DrKC MD]]'s summary seems to take the latter route.
# It is not clear to me that it's first sentence is correct: "The committee which came to this conclusion issued a majority and minority report." It seems from the Daniel P. Jordan's [https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/research-report-on-jefferson-and-hemings/minority-report-of-the-monticello-research-committee-on-thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings/ cover letter dated March 23, 2000] that this report was issued by White McKenzie Wallenborn, a member of the study committee, of his own accord, and without any apparent endorsement by the committee or by the Foundation. It was published significantly prior to the committee's final report and was discussed and rejected by the committee prior to their producing the "majority report".[https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/thomas-jefferson-and-sally-hemings-a-brief-account/research-report-on-jefferson-and-hemings/response-to-the-minority-report/]
I haven't worked on this article before today, and I would gladly defer to other editors who have spent more time thinking about how to frame these issues. [[User:Daask|Daask]] ([[User talk:Daask|talk]]) 21:21, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
== [[Lewis Woodson]] potential critical issues ==
Please see [[Talk:Lewis_Woodson#biased_article]]. I thought the subjects are related so input from those watching this talk page could be beneficial. [[User:Commander Keane|Commander Keane]] ([[User talk:Commander Keane|talk]]) 01:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
| |||