This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Humanism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
Humanism has been listed as one of the
Philosophy and religion good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: August 23, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
This
level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hi @ Manbooferie:, I believe that the information you have added does not warrant inclusion as it appears to violate Wikipedia's policy on undue weight ( WP:UNDUE). I can not see how this addition contributes to a deeper understanding of the concept of Humanism. It seems indicative of being undue, particularly because the absence of contemporary secondary reliable sources on humanism, discussing this issue.
I kindly request that you review the guidelines outlined in the Wikipedia:Consensus policy. I look forward to your response, Cinadon 36 12:40, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Manbooferie:, I feel that this edit too, [4] just adds trivial info to the article. Etymology does not mean "history of usage". You are citing a primary source, a book published more than three centuries ago. This looks to me as Original Research. Maybe I am wrong and suffering from " article ownership". I dont know. So, if you insist on the edit, I will request a comment from another editor [5] or add a note at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard [6], whatever you wish. Maybe other editors can help us navigate this. Cinadon 36 15:07, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Response to third opinion request: |
Because the article just achieved GA status, the standard for additions to it is higher than usual. That being said, entomology includes not just a word's origin but also how the word's meaning has changed over time. Citing dictionaries from various times is certainly a reasonable approach to documenting changes to a word's definition. While it would be fantastic to find a single source that discusses this topic, there is nothing wrong with using several sources. I do not consider this approach to be original research nor do I find these to be primary sources. I am by no means an expert on this topic and found the text discussing the word's change in usage over time to be helpful information and not trivial. However, there does seem to be some question about the connection of the content to the cited sources and, perhaps, a suggestion of an alternative source and content. This matter is somewhat beyond the scope of your third opinion request, but I will dig deeper if that would be helpful. A copy edit of the new content might also make it flow better with the rest of the article. Rublamb ( talk) 02:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC) |
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add the below text to the "Varieties of Humanism" section:
Secular Humanistic Judaism prioritizes human values, ethics, and cultural identity over religious dogma. It embraces a secular perspective, encouraging personal autonomy, inclusivity, while celebrating life's milestones with Jewish ritual. Aligned with social justice, it reflects a commitment to reason and individual responsibility, and defines Jewish identity as a rich cultural heritage rather than solely a religious affiliation.
Source: [1] Michaelwitkin ( talk) 18:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Cinadon, can you help me understand this part of the lede. It says the meaning of humanism has changed I've read the paragraph a few times and I don't quite understand - I think it is referring to the current meaning of humanism, and the modern organizations dedicated to humanism, have moved away from its original context. Humanism and the very idea of a human agency were, of course, a huge deal in the Renaissance, and this meaning is still the same through the Age of Enlightenment. The first sentence uses this definition, so the newer meaning - is it postmodern or something? I have only done brief reading on this, you have obviously done a lot more reading about this. Do you have any input? Ben Azura ( talk) 03:31, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Humanism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 180 days |
Humanism has been listed as one of the
Philosophy and religion good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: August 23, 2023. ( Reviewed version). |
This
level-4 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hi @ Manbooferie:, I believe that the information you have added does not warrant inclusion as it appears to violate Wikipedia's policy on undue weight ( WP:UNDUE). I can not see how this addition contributes to a deeper understanding of the concept of Humanism. It seems indicative of being undue, particularly because the absence of contemporary secondary reliable sources on humanism, discussing this issue.
I kindly request that you review the guidelines outlined in the Wikipedia:Consensus policy. I look forward to your response, Cinadon 36 12:40, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Hi @ Manbooferie:, I feel that this edit too, [4] just adds trivial info to the article. Etymology does not mean "history of usage". You are citing a primary source, a book published more than three centuries ago. This looks to me as Original Research. Maybe I am wrong and suffering from " article ownership". I dont know. So, if you insist on the edit, I will request a comment from another editor [5] or add a note at Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard [6], whatever you wish. Maybe other editors can help us navigate this. Cinadon 36 15:07, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
Response to third opinion request: |
Because the article just achieved GA status, the standard for additions to it is higher than usual. That being said, entomology includes not just a word's origin but also how the word's meaning has changed over time. Citing dictionaries from various times is certainly a reasonable approach to documenting changes to a word's definition. While it would be fantastic to find a single source that discusses this topic, there is nothing wrong with using several sources. I do not consider this approach to be original research nor do I find these to be primary sources. I am by no means an expert on this topic and found the text discussing the word's change in usage over time to be helpful information and not trivial. However, there does seem to be some question about the connection of the content to the cited sources and, perhaps, a suggestion of an alternative source and content. This matter is somewhat beyond the scope of your third opinion request, but I will dig deeper if that would be helpful. A copy edit of the new content might also make it flow better with the rest of the article. Rublamb ( talk) 02:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC) |
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I would like to add the below text to the "Varieties of Humanism" section:
Secular Humanistic Judaism prioritizes human values, ethics, and cultural identity over religious dogma. It embraces a secular perspective, encouraging personal autonomy, inclusivity, while celebrating life's milestones with Jewish ritual. Aligned with social justice, it reflects a commitment to reason and individual responsibility, and defines Jewish identity as a rich cultural heritage rather than solely a religious affiliation.
Source: [1] Michaelwitkin ( talk) 18:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Cinadon, can you help me understand this part of the lede. It says the meaning of humanism has changed I've read the paragraph a few times and I don't quite understand - I think it is referring to the current meaning of humanism, and the modern organizations dedicated to humanism, have moved away from its original context. Humanism and the very idea of a human agency were, of course, a huge deal in the Renaissance, and this meaning is still the same through the Age of Enlightenment. The first sentence uses this definition, so the newer meaning - is it postmodern or something? I have only done brief reading on this, you have obviously done a lot more reading about this. Do you have any input? Ben Azura ( talk) 03:31, 6 January 2024 (UTC)