Talk:Mandarese people

Anthropology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology 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.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Ethnic groups Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities 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.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Indonesia Low‑importance

	Indonesia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics 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.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sources

@Arsi786:: please explain how the Joshua Project is a reliable, unbiased source for the headcount of Muslims among Mandarese people. Wakari07 (talk) 13:53, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wakari07:: SummerPHDV accepts these sources as they seen to be reliable and basic internet search can show you they are majority muslim. I don't know what your problem is but if you can find a source that says otherwise then I will leave this matter alone. Arsi786 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:03, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean the Joshua Project is reliable because it's seen as such by SummerPHDV? Do you mean User:SummerPhDv2.0? Wakari07 (talk) 14:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wakari07:: SummerPHDV has been a very long time member atwikipedia so should know what is legit or not also I added other references regarding their religion but she said it was not valid so I found this source and it seemed fine also even in indonesia the area that they are from sulawesi is a majority muslim area while the north and some middle areas of sulawesi are christian if you can find another source that says otherwise then I will leave this matter alone. Arsi786 (talk

Hi @Arsi786: and @Wakari07:. It seems to me that there is some issue of using the Joshua Project as a source for religion statistic. In regards to biasness, I do not find the statistic of the Mandar people given from Joshua Project indicates any favoritism of the Christian faith. In fact it acknowledges that the Mandar people are indeed majority Muslims. However, when it comes to citation, it is preferred to cite from a more reliable scholarly source eg. research journals. It is not clear how and when (eg. year) Joshua project comes up with the figures in the statistic. I feel that unless there are no existing census conducted on the people group on their population, religion, etc. then you may use Joshua Project as a citation to give a general conclusion but not of their specific data count. Just my 2 cents. -Jeblat (talk) 15:37, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arsi786: I do not recall ever having said the Joshua Project is a reliable source. To the best of my knowledge, I don't think I've ever said anything about it at all.

IMO, it is fairly evident that the Joshua Project is biased. Check the "Progress" indicator. What is "progress" to them? Lower levels of poverty, disease or crime? Longer lifespans? No, of course not. They measure progress through conversion to Evangelical Christianity. If you don't smell bias there, please see a doctor because your nose isn't working. - SummerPhD^v2.0 20:26, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SummerPhDv2.0: Alot of wiki pages use joshua projects as an reference and my original link was legit and it also had a green padlock in its url bar but you said its not valid because it was lacking in its population as it states it has half of a million people but the wiki page leaves no references proving that there is over million of them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsi786 (talk • contribs) 16:34, March 17, 2018 (UTC)

I am not here to discuss a lot of Wikipedia articles or other wikiprojects. I am discussing this article. If you find problems in other articles, please address those concerns on those articles' talk pages.

I see no indication that the Joshua Project is a reliable source. I see a strong indication of bias. If you would like to use the Joshua Project for anything other than noncontroversial basic information about itself in Joshua Project, you will need to demonstrate that it meets the requirements outlined at WP:IRS. I do not see that happening. - SummerPhD^v2.0 21:11, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reaction. Wakari07 (talk) 21:37, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

SummerPhDv2.0: The problem is sorted now and I suggest we end this argument and I only used joshua project as you had discredited the other source I had gave. Arsi786 21:18, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]