![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Roger 8 Roger, you had renamed the "Modern era" section (which follows the "History" section) to "Early 20th century to present". I had further renamed it to "Recent times", pointing out that the name you used might fit into the History section, but certainly not after it. You have reverted that edit, arguing that "recent" is too vague a term. I do not entirely disagree, but that leaves the question what to do with that section unanswered.
One option would be to move it one level down, into the History section. Then the current title could stay, but it's a long and deeply nested section, and having to move all its subsections down doesn't seem ideal. I also suppose that's the reason why it's currently a main section. But if it stays outside the "History" section, then the current title cannot stay and needs to be changed again – so which title or resolution would you, and others here, suggest? Personally I think that "Recent times" or "Cannibalism is recent times" is good enough, since the contents of the section quickly clarify which time period is meant. Another more specific option would be "After World War I" or "Cannibalism after World War I". Gawaon ( talk) 17:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Human cannibalism has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"Alfred Packer" misspelt as "Alferd Packer" 122.199.45.88 ( talk) 05:14, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Can't edit as semi-protected. "Believes" should be "beliefs" in 3rd paragraph under Exo-, endo- and autocannibalism Felixhj ( talk) 23:44, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Offers the long discredited claim that they were hunter-gatherers when extensive evidence suggests they were agriculturalists. Other pages have been updated, not sure why this one isn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bangalaa ( talk • contribs) 08:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
It is a form of alternative sensory warfare used to humiliate enemies, practiced in front of survivors to intimidate them.(see: "Sensory Worlds in Early America") — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brit.b ( talk • contribs) 20:59, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
The Polynesia and Melanesia section's first paragraph is about New Zealand. New Zealand is not in either of those regions. It should be in its own section. 219.88.232.119 ( talk) 20:52, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Human cannibalism has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Cannibalism is, as of 2024, practiced as a means of sustenance by The Ahgoree' of India who eat human flesh and feces as food. Ripplegold ( talk) 16:54, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
I don't think the term "it's said" is the best term to be used in the context: It sounds like a myth, or something that could have been totally made up. Doesn't fit well. I think it would fit better "It's believed" or "there's evidence of" but it's more of a linguistic problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.90.222.212 ( talk • contribs) 02:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
Roger 8 Roger, you had renamed the "Modern era" section (which follows the "History" section) to "Early 20th century to present". I had further renamed it to "Recent times", pointing out that the name you used might fit into the History section, but certainly not after it. You have reverted that edit, arguing that "recent" is too vague a term. I do not entirely disagree, but that leaves the question what to do with that section unanswered.
One option would be to move it one level down, into the History section. Then the current title could stay, but it's a long and deeply nested section, and having to move all its subsections down doesn't seem ideal. I also suppose that's the reason why it's currently a main section. But if it stays outside the "History" section, then the current title cannot stay and needs to be changed again – so which title or resolution would you, and others here, suggest? Personally I think that "Recent times" or "Cannibalism is recent times" is good enough, since the contents of the section quickly clarify which time period is meant. Another more specific option would be "After World War I" or "Cannibalism after World War I". Gawaon ( talk) 17:36, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Human cannibalism has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"Alfred Packer" misspelt as "Alferd Packer" 122.199.45.88 ( talk) 05:14, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
Can't edit as semi-protected. "Believes" should be "beliefs" in 3rd paragraph under Exo-, endo- and autocannibalism Felixhj ( talk) 23:44, 4 September 2023 (UTC)
Offers the long discredited claim that they were hunter-gatherers when extensive evidence suggests they were agriculturalists. Other pages have been updated, not sure why this one isn't. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bangalaa ( talk • contribs) 08:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
It is a form of alternative sensory warfare used to humiliate enemies, practiced in front of survivors to intimidate them.(see: "Sensory Worlds in Early America") — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brit.b ( talk • contribs) 20:59, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
The Polynesia and Melanesia section's first paragraph is about New Zealand. New Zealand is not in either of those regions. It should be in its own section. 219.88.232.119 ( talk) 20:52, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
Human cannibalism has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Cannibalism is, as of 2024, practiced as a means of sustenance by The Ahgoree' of India who eat human flesh and feces as food. Ripplegold ( talk) 16:54, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
I don't think the term "it's said" is the best term to be used in the context: It sounds like a myth, or something that could have been totally made up. Doesn't fit well. I think it would fit better "It's believed" or "there's evidence of" but it's more of a linguistic problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.90.222.212 ( talk • contribs) 02:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)