Based on the criteria described in the source (see source_file: link txt), the determination of whether a group consists of human beings is not limited to their outward resemblance, but depends on a set of spiritual and cultural characteristics.
In one of the excerpts it is explained that upon encountering the indigenous peoples of America, the Spanish, by asking questions about their faith and attitude towards the afterlife, came to the conclusion that the presence of such beliefs signifies human nature:"When in America the Spanish and the English encountered the red-skinned Indians, they, too, did not immediately understand who stood before them: were they human or not?The Spanish applied a correct method: they began asking the Indians whether they believed in God and the afterlife. Once convinced that the Indians believed in both, the Spanish recognized them as human and made every effort to convert them to Christianity. The English, however, based on the physical dissimilarity of the Indians to the white Europeans and the hostility they showed towards the newcomers, refused to recognize them as human, made no efforts to convert them to Christianity, and hunted them like wild beasts." (source: link txt)This reasoning shows that belonging to the human category was determined not only by anthropometric or physiological features. At the same time, the same source clearly emphasizes that beings, even if they bear an obvious physical resemblance to humans, may not be considered human if their inner properties (for example, spirit, culture, system of values) differ from the established criteria:"Let us apply the Spanish method to prehistoric anthropology. And if we cannot ask ancient fossil hominids and humans, 'What do you believe in?' then we can carefully examine their remains from this perspective. Driopithecines, australopithecines, and similar entities are certainly not human, despite their undeniable physical resemblance to humans." (source: link txt)Applying this logic to the Guries, one can say the following: if the characteristics of the Guries (the objects or groups under your consideration) include those spiritual or cultural qualities that, according to the described method, were used to recognize a group as human, then they can be classified as human. However, if their features represent a different, specific set of properties that does not fall under the notion of "human" per the above criteria, then their classification indeed takes on a unique character and they may be considered separately.Thus, the answer to your question depends on the specific properties that the Guries possess: if they meet the criteria used to recognize a group as human (for example, having faith, social norms, and values), then they can be considered human; if their differences are of a fundamentally different nature, then their classification will be specific and cannot be reduced to the conventional category of "human."