I would like to write some stub article on the Aryan invasion in India (ca. 1700 BC). However, when I get to the Wikipedia page on 'Aryan', I read "[The term Aryan] can no longer be used in any constructive way."
So what am I to do now? 1. Make up some new word to describe the concept, 2. Just delete that text from the page, 3. Just write my own piece as if this text is not there?
Andre Engels
Disregard this one, I think I already solved it.
Andre Engels
I wrote:
I would like to write some stub article on the Aryan invasion in India (ca. 1700 BC). However, when I get to the Wikipedia page on 'Aryan', I read "[The term Aryan] can no longer be used in any constructive way."
So what am I to do now?
- Make up some new word to describe the concept,
- Just delete that text from the page,
- Just write my own piece as if this text is not there?
This is one of those occasions where NPOV is prescriptive as well as descriptive. We should point out that the term has been abused to a point where many people are not aware of its original meanings, but that should not stop us from, using it correctly. In the same way, the page on Swastika explains the origins of the symbol as well as its misuse, and does not shirk from showing an image of one.
Andre Engels wrote:
I would like to write some stub article on the Aryan invasion in India (ca. 1700 BC). However, when I get to the Wikipedia page on 'Aryan', I read "[The term Aryan] can no longer be used in any constructive way."
So what am I to do now?
- Make up some new word to describe the concept,
- Just delete that text from the page,
- Just write my own piece as if this text is not there?
Andre Engels
[Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
This is one of those occasions where NPOV is prescriptive as well as descriptive. We should point out that the term has been abused to a point where many people are not aware of its original meanings, but that should not stop us from, using it correctly.
But how can we use it correctly and at the same time say that "it cannot be used in a constructive way"?
In the same way, the page on Swastika explains the origins of the symbol as well as its misuse, and does not shirk from showing an image of one.
Yes, but the page does not say something along the line "Since the Nazi time, there is no good reason any more to show a Swastika".
N.B.: As said, I have already kind of resolved it. I have put my own text in a separate article, with a reference to the "Aryan" article to say that it's not really etymologically correct usage of the term. I have removed the line I had a problem with from the article (something that reasonable people disagree with is POV, and I assume you and I are reasonable people), added a link to my article and left the rest as it was.
Andre Engels
I would like to write some stub article on the Aryan invasion in India (ca. 1700 BC). However, when I get to the Wikipedia page on 'Aryan', I read "[The term Aryan] can no longer be used in any constructive way."
So what am I to do now?
- Make up some new word to describe the concept,
- Just delete that text from the page,
- Just write my own piece as if this text is not there?
If we can handle [[Nigger]], we ought to be able to handle [[Aryan]]. That blanket prohibition, however well-meant politically, seems over the top to me. My Cambridge Desk Encyclopedia says the Aryans were a prehistoric Indo-European people who spoke a now lost language. Is that not so?
Besides, it's paradoxical to say
"[The term Aryan] can no longer be used in any constructive way."
which is somewhere between "This page left intentionally blank" and "This is not a pipe".
I'd delete the sentence, add an explanation about the pseudo-historical takeover of the term about the Nazis and forge ahead.
Tom Parmenter Ortolan88
|From: Andre Engels engels@uni-koblenz.de |Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2002 14:09:44 +0200 (CEST) | |I would like to write some stub article on the Aryan invasion in India |(ca. 1700 BC). However, when I get to the Wikipedia page on 'Aryan', I read |"[The term Aryan] can no longer be used in any constructive way." | |So what am I to do now? |1. Make up some new word to describe the concept, |2. Just delete that text from the page, |3. Just write my own piece as if this text is not there? | |Andre Engels |
I would just delete the line and write your article. Obviously, if you have an article to write, you can use the term in a constructive way.
Stephen Gilbert
--- Andre Engels engels@uni-koblenz.de wrote:
I would like to write some stub article on the Aryan invasion in India (ca. 1700 BC). However, when I get to the Wikipedia page on 'Aryan', I read "[The term Aryan] can no longer be used in any constructive way."
So what am I to do now?
- Make up some new word to describe the concept,
- Just delete that text from the page,
- Just write my own piece as if this text is not
there?
Andre Engels
[Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
__________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! News - Today's headlines http://news.yahoo.com
Andre Engels wrote:
I would like to write some stub article on the Aryan invasion in India (ca. 1700 BC). However, when I get to the Wikipedia page on 'Aryan', I read "[The term Aryan] can no longer be used in any constructive way."
So what am I to do now?
- Make up some new word to describe the concept,
- Just delete that text from the page,
- Just write my own piece as if this text is not there?
Nobody should be held linguistically captive to a group that has chosen to misuse or abuse a term for its own politcal ends. Allowing that long after that group has been otherwise defeated gives it a victory of sorts. It means that they have been allowed to set the agenda for a language.
Eclecticology
wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org