This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Tariq Ali 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 |
![]() | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ali criticized Salmon Rushdie and Susan Sontag for their support of NATO's bombing of Kosovo which killed hundreds of innocent children. He called these 'warrior writers', the Belligerati. I learned this from Michael Mandel's book, How America Gets Away With Murder. Teetotaler
Except that there was no genocide as such, but hey, why let facts get in the way? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.252.42.161 ( talk) 04:50, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
The following text was found on the main page inserted by the user 129.15.93.82
I would have to point out that both terms --"Anti-Americanism" and "Anti-Israel"-- as used by the author above are terms of propaganda and not a terms of description. Tariq Ali's concerns are well expressed in his non-fiction: They are critical of American policies in the Middle East, this position is not synonymous with "Anti-American" or "Anti-Israel".
Moved to talk page by Chancemill 15:16, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)
"brown sahib" needs an explanation. Pjacobi 14:09, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
what did he study at uni? what degree/s does he have?
""From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/feature_tariqali.shtml --( Mingus ah um 19:30, 12 April 2006 (UTC))
There is a reasonable list of works on http://www.contemporarywriters.com/authors/?p=auth164#bibliography does anyone know where to get ISBN numbers?
This article is definately POV. Could someone maybe edit it? I mean, keep the information, but it's wording is overtly point of view. Эйрон Кинни ( t) 23:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Do we have reliable sources who call him a historian (i.e. not his own publishers or website, but a mainstream literary journal, academic journal, or newspaper that has reviewed his work)? SlimVirgin (talk) 19:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
No, he's a historian. He studies, analyses and expands his views on history, that makes him a historian. No journal has to recognize him as such, for him to be one. That's like seeing someone play the piano often, but saying we need a newspaper quote to call him a musician, it's absurd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.252.42.161 ( talk) 04:55, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 20:01, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I am under the impression that it is customary for one's hyphenated nationality to place the native or originating land first and adopted land second. If this holds true, Tariq Ali is a Pakistani-British and the label should be changed to say this. — Blanchette ( talk) 07:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I have found a discussion of this issue in a Wikipedia "Categories for deletion" log [1] where the comments from British Wikipedians would indicate the reverse order in British usage, e.g. British Asian, British Pakistani, etc. The hyphen is apparently optional but increasingly dropped when used to create an adjective and obsolete when using the words to make a noun. See Hyphenated American for links to usage guides on this point. Also clinching the point is the article British Pakistanis. By contrast see Pakistani American. In sum: the word order is correct but the hyphen should probably be removed here and in other places on Wikipedia where the British-nationality n format is used. — Blanchette ( talk) 07:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Ali's name has just been added in Arabic, although he is of Pakistani origin. Would it not be much more appropriate to add his name in Punjabi or Urdu? -- Mia-etol ( talk) 19:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Changed from stub class but don't know what it really rates, just that stub is misleading by now. Julia Rossi ( talk) 10:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
This sentence surely needs to be removed (as Iraq has arguably had a number of governments since 2003, unless "government" here means the system that was devised post-invasion....which would be confusing). It needs a citation as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.59.153.151 ( talk) 23:47, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps someone with more wikipedia experience might be more able to explain why my contribution keeps getting deleted. I have tried - clearly against the wishes of a particular editor - to add to the last section of "career", a properly cited reference to Ali's participation in the documentary film Scotland Yet.
To my knowledge, this was the only feature film made about the Scottish independence referendum and was widely released in 2014, his participation seems notable to me. Jackf834 ( talk) 09:40, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
This article skips over anything Ali did between 1981 and 1990. He was still active in politics.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 11:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
There has been a recent edit war about the following claim:
Campaigning in the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016 shows there were left groups supporting Brexit. John Pilger was also pro-Brexit [2] This claim does seem misleading.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:19, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
We mention some of his books in the lead, some of his books in the body, and list many of them under "Works (partial list)". It seems somewhat random. Is there a better way to handle this?-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:03, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi there. Although Ali still appreciates Trotsky he doesn't describe himself as a Trotskyist. That article is also featured on his website and his antipathy, in lack of better words, for modern Trotskyist movements is even mentioned on his article here on Wikipedia. So listing him in 'Category:British Trotskyists' , other Trotsky-related Categories and the like is debatable. A removal from those pages might be a reasonable action. My main points regarding this are:
I think the first point is the more relevant one. If there is newer information regarding this that contradicts my assumption I'm up for discussing it. Might even be additional points I haven't considered. Kxxvii ( talk) 17:49, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
The lead calls him a historian, based on this: https://web.archive.org/web/20071114152714/http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07%2F10%2F10%2F1414233 Is that a good enough source for this term? There's nothing else in the article which seems to warrant it. BobFromBrockley ( talk) 14:00, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Tariq Ali 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 |
![]() | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ali criticized Salmon Rushdie and Susan Sontag for their support of NATO's bombing of Kosovo which killed hundreds of innocent children. He called these 'warrior writers', the Belligerati. I learned this from Michael Mandel's book, How America Gets Away With Murder. Teetotaler
Except that there was no genocide as such, but hey, why let facts get in the way? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.252.42.161 ( talk) 04:50, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
The following text was found on the main page inserted by the user 129.15.93.82
I would have to point out that both terms --"Anti-Americanism" and "Anti-Israel"-- as used by the author above are terms of propaganda and not a terms of description. Tariq Ali's concerns are well expressed in his non-fiction: They are critical of American policies in the Middle East, this position is not synonymous with "Anti-American" or "Anti-Israel".
Moved to talk page by Chancemill 15:16, Jan 20, 2004 (UTC)
"brown sahib" needs an explanation. Pjacobi 14:09, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
what did he study at uni? what degree/s does he have?
""From: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbcfour/documentaries/features/feature_tariqali.shtml --( Mingus ah um 19:30, 12 April 2006 (UTC))
There is a reasonable list of works on http://www.contemporarywriters.com/authors/?p=auth164#bibliography does anyone know where to get ISBN numbers?
This article is definately POV. Could someone maybe edit it? I mean, keep the information, but it's wording is overtly point of view. Эйрон Кинни ( t) 23:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Do we have reliable sources who call him a historian (i.e. not his own publishers or website, but a mainstream literary journal, academic journal, or newspaper that has reviewed his work)? SlimVirgin (talk) 19:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
No, he's a historian. He studies, analyses and expands his views on history, that makes him a historian. No journal has to recognize him as such, for him to be one. That's like seeing someone play the piano often, but saying we need a newspaper quote to call him a musician, it's absurd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.252.42.161 ( talk) 04:55, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 20:01, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
I am under the impression that it is customary for one's hyphenated nationality to place the native or originating land first and adopted land second. If this holds true, Tariq Ali is a Pakistani-British and the label should be changed to say this. — Blanchette ( talk) 07:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
I have found a discussion of this issue in a Wikipedia "Categories for deletion" log [1] where the comments from British Wikipedians would indicate the reverse order in British usage, e.g. British Asian, British Pakistani, etc. The hyphen is apparently optional but increasingly dropped when used to create an adjective and obsolete when using the words to make a noun. See Hyphenated American for links to usage guides on this point. Also clinching the point is the article British Pakistanis. By contrast see Pakistani American. In sum: the word order is correct but the hyphen should probably be removed here and in other places on Wikipedia where the British-nationality n format is used. — Blanchette ( talk) 07:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Ali's name has just been added in Arabic, although he is of Pakistani origin. Would it not be much more appropriate to add his name in Punjabi or Urdu? -- Mia-etol ( talk) 19:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Changed from stub class but don't know what it really rates, just that stub is misleading by now. Julia Rossi ( talk) 10:36, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
This sentence surely needs to be removed (as Iraq has arguably had a number of governments since 2003, unless "government" here means the system that was devised post-invasion....which would be confusing). It needs a citation as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.59.153.151 ( talk) 23:47, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps someone with more wikipedia experience might be more able to explain why my contribution keeps getting deleted. I have tried - clearly against the wishes of a particular editor - to add to the last section of "career", a properly cited reference to Ali's participation in the documentary film Scotland Yet.
To my knowledge, this was the only feature film made about the Scottish independence referendum and was widely released in 2014, his participation seems notable to me. Jackf834 ( talk) 09:40, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
This article skips over anything Ali did between 1981 and 1990. He was still active in politics.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 11:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
There has been a recent edit war about the following claim:
Campaigning in the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016 shows there were left groups supporting Brexit. John Pilger was also pro-Brexit [2] This claim does seem misleading.-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:19, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
We mention some of his books in the lead, some of his books in the body, and list many of them under "Works (partial list)". It seems somewhat random. Is there a better way to handle this?-- Jack Upland ( talk) 08:03, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi there. Although Ali still appreciates Trotsky he doesn't describe himself as a Trotskyist. That article is also featured on his website and his antipathy, in lack of better words, for modern Trotskyist movements is even mentioned on his article here on Wikipedia. So listing him in 'Category:British Trotskyists' , other Trotsky-related Categories and the like is debatable. A removal from those pages might be a reasonable action. My main points regarding this are:
I think the first point is the more relevant one. If there is newer information regarding this that contradicts my assumption I'm up for discussing it. Might even be additional points I haven't considered. Kxxvii ( talk) 17:49, 26 June 2018 (UTC)
The lead calls him a historian, based on this: https://web.archive.org/web/20071114152714/http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07%2F10%2F10%2F1414233 Is that a good enough source for this term? There's nothing else in the article which seems to warrant it. BobFromBrockley ( talk) 14:00, 13 October 2021 (UTC)