This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Indo-Aryan peoples 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:
1Auto-archiving period: 180 days
![]() |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
India,
Pakistan, and
Afghanistan, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
focus on part two 76. Mandavilli, Sujay Rao Part One http://www.scribd.com/doc/27103044/Sujay-NPAP-Part-One Part Two http://www.scribd.com/doc/27105677/Sujay-Npap-Part-Two Part One http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1324506 Part Two http://ssrn.com/abstract=1541822 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sujayrao2009 ( talk • contribs) 4 may 2010 (UTC)
Hi can someone help start a vote to convert all references an articles from "Indo-Aryan" to Indic? Indic is the long-standing, proper and academically-recognized linguistic and ethnic designation for this group of languages, and always has been.
Main reasons (there are more):
In addition to the Indo-Aryan languages articles, someone has also started a series of fictitious articles based on " Indo-Aryan people" which is equally ridiculous and an attempt to introduce baseless, poorly researched, Original Research into Wikipedia.
Looking forward to some cooperation among editors on fixing this major issue. Xoltron ( talk) 00:37, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
anthropologists and linguistics specialists, who have always designated this class of languages and ethnicities as Indic, not Indo-Aryan. Talking about linguistics, what are the following scholarly standard reference works then, chopped liver?
no basis in fact. To say that
specialists [...] have always designated this class of languages [...] as Indicbetrays an unfamiliarity with the existing literature that shouldn't be the starting point for a "vote"
the brahmin ethnic group all around india are speakers and bearers of the indo aryan language sanskrit since their very first migration from the banks of the river saraswati in modern day kashmir and haryana. they deserve a mention in this article as well. Temporary 1010 ( talk) 18:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
as per sources, wusun are suggested to be what is now obselete caucasian race/caucasoid [1] [2]which is different from the modern usage of term 'caucasion' exclusively used for white population by many countries [3] and should not be used in the context of this article. EXTREMELY misleading. Caucasoid has been used as an umbrella term for phenotypically similar groups from different regions, with a focus on skeletal anatomy, and especially cranial morphology, without regard to skin tone [4] . read the wusun page as well. someone cleverly put this term here for pov pushing. This obsession of white ethno nationalists/supremacists to relate with anything aryan is extremely dangerous. user@ Manticore reverted the edit claiming it to be a rant when ITS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN SOURCES AS WELL AS PAGE of wusun.one has to be either brain dead or full of propaganda to disregard this misleading representation. The difference between caucasian race/caucasoid and modern usage of caucasian term is also clearly mentioned in Caucasian race page . As 'caucasian' term is still used exclusively for a specific population based on skin color it SHOULD not be used here. It should be changed to CAUCASOID or EUROPID. altough the question is why would anyone classify wusun as an obselete racial classification anyway? and if it is necessary why wud someone deliberately use a term that is still used to denote a certain population based on skin color in contrast to that obselete racial classification which was not based on skin color? hoping for rational admins to take a look into this. but i do feel the page is hijacked by aryan obsessed neo nazis who would do anything(including misleading information and misrepresentation) to satisfy their false ego and pseudo pride. Observer1989 ( talk) 13:06, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
References
Maenchen-Helfen
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).@ Capitals00 how is this forking? Also the fact you called a now confirmed sock puppet as blocked for "unrelated reasons" is suspicious in itself. Sutyarashi ( talk) 07:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Content forking is not necessarily POV-forking. It could also be simply redundant. For a better text flow, it is perfectly fine to have some redundancies, but one should always aim at a main/summary hierarchy of articles. A general issue with redundancies is the sychronization problem. E.g things are changed here but not in the main article and vice versa. This might indeed result in POV-forks if not constantly monitored. – Austronesier ( talk) 10:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Indo-Aryan peoples 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:
1Auto-archiving period: 180 days
![]() |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
India,
Pakistan, and
Afghanistan, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
focus on part two 76. Mandavilli, Sujay Rao Part One http://www.scribd.com/doc/27103044/Sujay-NPAP-Part-One Part Two http://www.scribd.com/doc/27105677/Sujay-Npap-Part-Two Part One http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1324506 Part Two http://ssrn.com/abstract=1541822 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sujayrao2009 ( talk • contribs) 4 may 2010 (UTC)
Hi can someone help start a vote to convert all references an articles from "Indo-Aryan" to Indic? Indic is the long-standing, proper and academically-recognized linguistic and ethnic designation for this group of languages, and always has been.
Main reasons (there are more):
In addition to the Indo-Aryan languages articles, someone has also started a series of fictitious articles based on " Indo-Aryan people" which is equally ridiculous and an attempt to introduce baseless, poorly researched, Original Research into Wikipedia.
Looking forward to some cooperation among editors on fixing this major issue. Xoltron ( talk) 00:37, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
anthropologists and linguistics specialists, who have always designated this class of languages and ethnicities as Indic, not Indo-Aryan. Talking about linguistics, what are the following scholarly standard reference works then, chopped liver?
no basis in fact. To say that
specialists [...] have always designated this class of languages [...] as Indicbetrays an unfamiliarity with the existing literature that shouldn't be the starting point for a "vote"
the brahmin ethnic group all around india are speakers and bearers of the indo aryan language sanskrit since their very first migration from the banks of the river saraswati in modern day kashmir and haryana. they deserve a mention in this article as well. Temporary 1010 ( talk) 18:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
as per sources, wusun are suggested to be what is now obselete caucasian race/caucasoid [1] [2]which is different from the modern usage of term 'caucasion' exclusively used for white population by many countries [3] and should not be used in the context of this article. EXTREMELY misleading. Caucasoid has been used as an umbrella term for phenotypically similar groups from different regions, with a focus on skeletal anatomy, and especially cranial morphology, without regard to skin tone [4] . read the wusun page as well. someone cleverly put this term here for pov pushing. This obsession of white ethno nationalists/supremacists to relate with anything aryan is extremely dangerous. user@ Manticore reverted the edit claiming it to be a rant when ITS CLEARLY MENTIONED IN SOURCES AS WELL AS PAGE of wusun.one has to be either brain dead or full of propaganda to disregard this misleading representation. The difference between caucasian race/caucasoid and modern usage of caucasian term is also clearly mentioned in Caucasian race page . As 'caucasian' term is still used exclusively for a specific population based on skin color it SHOULD not be used here. It should be changed to CAUCASOID or EUROPID. altough the question is why would anyone classify wusun as an obselete racial classification anyway? and if it is necessary why wud someone deliberately use a term that is still used to denote a certain population based on skin color in contrast to that obselete racial classification which was not based on skin color? hoping for rational admins to take a look into this. but i do feel the page is hijacked by aryan obsessed neo nazis who would do anything(including misleading information and misrepresentation) to satisfy their false ego and pseudo pride. Observer1989 ( talk) 13:06, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
References
Maenchen-Helfen
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).@ Capitals00 how is this forking? Also the fact you called a now confirmed sock puppet as blocked for "unrelated reasons" is suspicious in itself. Sutyarashi ( talk) 07:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Content forking is not necessarily POV-forking. It could also be simply redundant. For a better text flow, it is perfectly fine to have some redundancies, but one should always aim at a main/summary hierarchy of articles. A general issue with redundancies is the sychronization problem. E.g things are changed here but not in the main article and vice versa. This might indeed result in POV-forks if not constantly monitored. – Austronesier ( talk) 10:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)