Talk:Swastika/Archive 2

message: Please fix the error which suggests that the Swastika was introduced to India by Indian kings. As a historian, as well as enthusiast regarding this subject, the Swastika was introduced to India by the Old Persians along side the Sanskrit language. Infact the earliest Sanskrit writings found in the world are in Iran (Persia), as well as shards using the Swastika symbol, were found in Northeren Iran, dating back 5000 bc. There are also thousands of documented writings demonstrating how the swastika was introduced to India along side the introduction of the Sanskrit language.
:The traditional view was certainly that the swastika is an Indo-Iranian motif, but the Elamite and IVC discoveries suggest that its presence pre-dates Indo-Iranian culture in the area (though of course similar shapes used thousands of years apart do not necessarily imply continuity of symbolism). Northern Iran in 5000BC was not a Sanskrit speaking culture. You also seem to be conflating Elamites and Iranians. We have to be careful how we define cultures, and avoid pointless nationalist arguing over who had it first. But we also have to represent different points of view. BTW, new discussions should be placed at the bottom of the page. Paul B 10:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find any reference to the 5000BC date, which seems rather early! Where did you get this date? Paul B 11:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, you seem to have got the date from here,  , cutting and pasting the passage complete with "1020" reference, but this is the only source I can find  - after a quick search - with this date, and the passage that includes it seems odd. Paul B 11:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Your first link is the same as the one I have already posted as your likely source. The second one says nothing about 5000BC. My guess is that the first link is copied from the second (many paragraphs are identical) with some idiosyncratic material - including the 5000BC date - being added. Possibly the date is a misunderstanding from a comment somewhere about it being possibly 5000 years old. But maybe not. We shall await the information you have requested! Regarding the history of Iranian languages, you might want to read Elam, Indo-Iranians, Proto-Indo-European. Very few people believe that an Iranian language existed in 5000BC. Paul B 17:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Introduction of the Swastika to India

message: I find it amazing that there are still people who question where the Swastika originated from. I mean the oldest major religion is Hinduism, and Hinduism uses the swastika, so common sense means that it is fair to say that it may have originated out of Hinduism....71.119.255.31 21:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It may be the oldest major religion, but that does not mean the swastika originated from hinduism. You seem to be assuming that the symbol has to have originated from religion which makes little sense. Indeed you seem to be assuming not just any religion but a major religion. But it's just as easily possible it originated from an early minor religion, and was then subsumed into Hinduism. Or alternatively, it may have originated outside religion or arisen multiple times (as the article suggests) Nil Einne 16:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Swastika originated out of Hinduism 

message: Is there a reason for "Star of David" in this article pointing to Seal of Solomon and not Star of David? Symbols are similar, but judging from those articles their meaning is different. GhePeU 23:41, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just edited links, if you revert them please explain here the motives, thank you. GhePeU 12:47, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Star of David/Seal of Solomon

message: I'm sorry, I had to remove substantial parts about "symbolism" and "history". Unsubstantiated stuff seems just to pile up on this article. The problem was that all these assertions came without references. If you provide book sources to who said these things, it will be a different matter altogether, but this is the difference between Wikipedia and your average geocities page: we don't just ramble about things we have heard. We look them up. See sauwastika: It is unsightly, but carefully researched. I prefer concise references over flowing prose any day. dab (ᛏ) 07:33, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: removed bits

message: alright, I see there was an edit summary. the changes, I am sorry to say, were still ill informed. There is no such thing as "Classical Vedic Sanskrit". As for the -ka suffix, the prime reference for this would be Wackernagel's Sanskrit Grammar, vol. II.2, p. 515ff. It is the standard diminutive suffix in Sanskrit, as any other grammar will tell you, too. dab (ᛏ) 08:02, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: etymology

message: In "Lilith" there is a novel which french translated titled is "décodification" in which Primo Levi explains that the Nazi symbol is obtained crossing "n" and "s" of national socialism.
Anyone has an idea why Primo Levi explains that while you get no Swastika if you cross an n and a s?
(and considering he knows better than any of us what is national socialism)
::I've no idea why he says it, but it's just plain wrong. However, I can see that the vertical axis might be interpreted as a stylised S and the horizontal one as a backward N. Takes some effort of imagination, though. 
::If it's a novel, it counts as fiction, so perhaps he did intend it to be taken as a factual account. Paul B 17:35, 13 April 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Primo Levi's contribution 

message: I see there has been a bit of discussion here about the notion of the Swastika as an "Indo-European" symbol. I don't know what the history of that was in the article-text, but I do think that this article would be improved by a cogherent account of the reason behind the expansion of Swastika motifs in the West during the late 19th and early 20th century, and that was undoubtedly closely tied to Indo-Europeanism (i.e. Aryanism). In other words, the the belief that it was a specifically IE/Aryan motif was central to its popularity. At the moment it appears that Kipling liked it because it was Indian, and the Nazis picked it up because of some quirky ideas of theirs. The reference to Schliemann, who was actually the central figure in defining the Swastika as Indo-European, is isolated and rather oddly stuck-on. But it was bevcause of his findings in Troy and his correspondence with Emile Burnouf that the motif "took off" in the West, and then became associated with Aryanist ideas, Max Muller's "Sun Myth" theories and emerging Nietzschean ideas about Zoroastrianism etc etc. Without this tradition of thought, I've no doubt that swastika would not have been so widespread as it was in the West in the 1880-1930 period. Paul B 17:35, 13 April 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Ignore above. The material is in there. I just read badly. Still, I think this stuff about the belief that Germans being 'predestined' to rule the world is slightly OTT. Paul B 13:35, 14 April 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the whole idea could be outlined more clearly, and in greater detail. Maybe on fascist symbolism, nazi mysticism, Nordic theory, or aryan race, or a new specialized article. dab (ᛏ) 11:24, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

text: It should be noted that many Indian are considered Aryan and the crazy nazis and crazy hitler just took the swastika and chnanged the idea of the Aryans 71.119.255.31 21:00, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nazis and Hindus and "Indo-Europeans"

message: Currently the article says, "The history of the swastika goes back to the origins of the Eurasian continent".  How many hundreds of millions of years ago was that? PittBill 00:43, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''How''' far back are the origins? 

message: because of wikipedia is communism vandalism.  I don't want it to happen again, the featured article was gone for a couple minutes.  Please unprotect soon. -Frazzydee|✍ 01:46, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: (soon being when it's no longer FA) -Frazzydee|✍ 02:10, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Protected against moves 

message: First off, great page. I had no idea that the swastika was and still is so widespread in a non-nazi context.  Anyway, theres a bit of a mangled sentence in the Abrahamic Religions section, which goes "However, a proposed direct link between and a swastika floor mosaic..." If someone knows what this is supposed to say, could they fix it RMoloney 10:13, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: The Abrahamic Religions

message: Near where i live in Dublin, Ireland, there is a building in the shape of a
swastika (As seen from the air). The urban myth is that it was built in that
shape so it would be passed over by any Nazi bombers if air-raids were to
happen during WWII. I'm sure the real reason is different, but if it can be
verified, it might make an interesting sidenote on this page.
RMoloney 10:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: the structure may be visible on google maps.....  where exactly is it?  it's not the swastika laundry!  :-)   JXM 16:58, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

text: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&t=k&ll=32.676079,-117.157742&spn=0.002104,0.003873&t=k 
Perfect 45 degree alignment and the shadowing adds a nice effect. 58.147.0.42 21:56, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swastika-shaped Houses & Buildings on Google Maps 

message: Swastikas, gammadions and fylfots, otherwise known as manji, are normally presented with lots of flowers and lavenders and purples by Asians.  It might be wise to present a truer picture of the warmth and happiness associated with this dumb-looking symbol.  Furthermore, it is certainly just one word among many in the East Asian lexicon.  A compare and contrast ought to be done with the words ladder, little brother, snivel and cardinality each of which has the swastika built inside it.  Another word would be the Chinese Wu or Japanese Go meaning mouthbreeder or recreation/leisure/socializing when paired with the female radical.  It would be worth it to clear up the obvious political issues.  The events in Europe during the 40s belong in an International Courtroom.  A discussion of East Asian map legends with Swastika for Shrine or Religious Mountain, right next to Gas Food Lodging and right below National Forest would certainly be refreshing.  It would help to clear the air so a more sanguine attitude could be applied to the military and cultural details of the recent war.  In following this thinking, a properly decked out manji with extra flowers and holiday colors should really be used to set the tone.  Something is needed to illustrate this over and above the picture of the swastika with the heraldic roses.  It is more of a Christmas morning look that is indicated here.  If you've been to the Buddha's Birthday celebration in May at the Seoul temple near the US Embassy and the Sejong Cultural Center near Chungmuro you know what I mean.  Its like Christmas with flowers and trees and outdoor lights.  This is the direction to take.  It will be very helpful, not to mention Wiki Accurate.  McDogm--64.12.116.204 15:38, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: so I understand you want (yet) more images of swastikas, preferably happy looking ones with flowers? dab (ᛏ) 16:23, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't really use the swastikas; Asians and people associated with Asia are more or less considering other people's feelings at this point in world history.  But, if there are swastikas, they better not be threatening-looking, because that's not how the Asians, who invented them, use them.  Except, of course, in documentary usage.  --McDogm 13:01, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: contemporary use of swastikas fall into two, largely disjunct, fields, (a) Hinduism and related religions, and (b) Nazism. Both fields are reasonably well-covered, I believe. Historical usage is more involved, and you cannot claim that "Asians invented the Swastika", the symbol appears in Neolithic Europe, and it could have been re-invented any number of times all over the world, due to its simplicity. These historical issues are also reasonably well covered afaics, but feel free to point out any defects. dab (ᛏ) 12:15, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Happy Tones

message: Maybe it's my Firefox browser but the images were scanning wrong in Swastika#Geometry and symbolism, so I fixed it to scan like this left to right:
 A swastika composed of 17 squares in a 5x5 grid
 A right-facing swastika may be described as "clockwise"...
 ... or "counter-clockwise"
User:Dalf then changed it to scan like this:
 A swastika composed of 17 squares in a 5x5 grid
 ... or "counter-clockwise"
 A right-facing swastika may be described as "clockwise"...
Which looks wrong. Does it scan this way for other readers or is it just me in Cologne Blue skin? -Wikibob | Talk 22:09, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
::Yes, it varies depending on the display options you are using.  Paul B 22:50, 2005 May 1 (UTC)
:::That is strange.  My browser displays them in the revers ordering relative to how yours does.  Perhaps we should change the captions so they do not refrence eachotehr or use some mroe explicit code like a table with no borders or somesuch. Dalf | Talk 06:32, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: left to right misordering of image captions

message: The article claimed that Crispian Mills was thought to have "fascist" sympathies. I changed fascist to nazi, as I personally take great offence when people dont distinguish the two seperate ideaologies. Shanekorte 04:00, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor edit

message: http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/00/12/AP041200.html
interesting piece, if anyone is into doing a writeup. dab (ᛏ) 07:56, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Swastika forest]]

message: Incidentially, I am not sure people will like the new look you have given the Hinduism article (two swastikas, in the intro? come on.) dab (ᛏ) 08:43, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  bachmann -- read this 

message: Rather than revert, I've tried to integrate some of the more legitimate points from the above Jain contributor. But it takes a lot of time and effort and inevitably repetitions get missed (there are still several repeated statements). It's very tiring adopting this approach. However I'll summarise my intentions and some outstanding issues:
1. Putting the Hindu usage first in the overview seems legitimate.
2. The meaning of the Aryan connection is perhaps still slightly less clear than it could be, but readers can easily follow this up via the relevant articles on Indo-European topics.
3. I think the Jain contributor is probably right about the fact that the use of the motif in Amerindian culture was relatively minor, but was "blown up" during the Aryan craze when American ethnologists got all excited by the presence of swastikas, so the Navaho started sticking them on every saleable thing because they were trendy. However, I don't feel confident enough about the details of Amerindian cultural history to say this outright.
4. Someone who knows about the German legislation should contribute to the section about Jainism in Germany, however to describe the German legilature's aims as religious intolerance is surely unfair. Paul B 14:40 3 June 2005 (UTC)
:thank's Paul. I cannot be bothered too much with this kind of editor, at the moment, and I appreciate your patience and good faith. dab (ᛏ) 10:34, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know about "the holiest non-syllabic symbol (also see Om) in Hinduism." In Jainism, granted, but I don't know about an official Hindu ranking of holiness. "non-syllabic" is also bogus, there is no categorization in "syllabic" and "non-syllabic" signs, and this remark is simply crafted so the superlative can be used. I mean, see Hinduism — there is no Hindu canon, "Hinduism" is not even a Sanskrit term, it's more or less an umbrella term introduced by western Orientalists, and therefore it should be avoided to make sweeping statements about Hinduism as a whole. Yes, the swastika symbol is prevalent in India. Hell, we say so already, and have done so from the beginning, no dispute there. Hinduism is the only tradition mentioned in the intro. But to say "holiest in India, BILLIONS OF INDIANS, 3000 YEARS, uneducated westerners" in every other sentence, in unrelated parts of the article is just cheap rhetorics. dab (ᛏ) 11:01, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: revisions

message: the "an 8th century Icelandic manuscript" reference is symptomatic for this topic. It's very simple: either give a respectable reference (which manuscript? published? when/where?), or remove it.  It has the ring of a neo-pagan syncretist legend, and should not be endorsed until substantiated (I'm not saying it's necessarily false) dab (ᛏ) 10:34, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Thor's hammer"

message: Currently the article says that the swastika is still used in Finnish medals and decorations. Can someone verify this? Having visited the National Museum in Helsinki some time ago, I seem to recall reading there that the swastika was replaced in Finnish medals (including the Mannerheim cross) in 1961 (or thereabouts), but I could be wrong.
:As I put 3 external links to Finnish Defence Forces sites, there shouldn't be such a question. Mannerheim cross is awarded only during war, and last was awarded 1945. 1963 swastikas were removed from Grand Cross of Order of White Rose chais and replaced by spruce-crosses. No other replacements. Swatiska is still included in crosses and Presidential standard, see: http://www.presidentti.fi/eng/institution/ensign.html (Graphic is not the best; there should be yellow rose in center of yellow swastika. --Thule 15:19, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you mean this flag? : http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/fi-pres.html  A2Kafir 17:01, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that's much better. Thank you. --Thule 13:06, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finnish use 

message: This photograph has no reference in the article, the claims in the subtitle cannot be established.  Where was this photo taken?  Who by?  And what purpose does it serve in this article? Jachin 10:39, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: According to the image file it was uploaded by User:Alkivar, and is from Reuters. I don't see what the problem is. It's in the section on the post-war use of the swastika in the West - including political propaganda imagery of various kinds, so it seems apt. Paul B 14:34, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: in the interest of encyclopedicity, it would still be nice to present some specific defacing of some specific cemetary, rather than saying "oh, and here's a picture of a defaced cemetary, defaced by some neonazis, somewhere, sometime". That's clipart. dab (ᛏ) 12:43, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 'neo-nazi' defaced cemetary photo

message: I've removed :Image:Taipei subway temple symbol.jpg before. It was added again, apparently without comment. So on Taipei subway maps, temples are symbolized by swastikas. big deal, seeing that we say about 50 times in this article that the symbol is sacred in  Buddhism, Hinduism etc. Imho, this image is just a random snapshot with no encyclopedic value, clogging up an article that is already overburdened with images. dab (ᛏ) 17:08, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said in the edit summary: interesting image; seems the only one of contemporary use.--Patrick 18:53, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

text: fine, I'll not edit-war about it; still, "the only one of contemporary use"?? what about the Hindu swastika? the Falun Gong swastika? the Neo-Nazi ones? the Raelian one? Are they not from contemporary use? I mean, Hindu temples all over India are positively plastered with the things, there must be billions of swastika 'in contemporary use'. dab (ᛏ) 19:02, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: A metro map is printed every year or so, a wall may be old; the Raelian symbol was changed; I meant non-nazi related use.--Patrick 20:40, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: ok, but could it be cropped? Also, showing a snapshot of a swastika used as a symbol of buddhism around as an exhibit somehow runs counter to the continued efforts of Asian editors to convince us that really the symbol is widely and currently used, honestly it has nothing to do with Nazis, that is just a western thing. It's like we didn't believe them until some westerner went to Taipei and found that  *wow* they do use the swastika for Buddhism just like they use the crucifix for christianity. quick, take a picture, they were right all along, who would have thought.... That said, I don't think the image does any harm. It could just be cropped around the swastika so the article isn't dominated by a Taipei subway map too much. dab (ᛏ) 21:06, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It is already a photo of a little piece of the map, the whole point is to show where the symbol is used, not to just show how the symbol looks.--Patrick 23:14, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: image policing

message: The Jainism section is wrong. Jains do use the Aum symbol, though it looks different, more like the ek onkar (ੴ) of Sikhism. An example can be seen here. And the swastika is not their only symbol. The hand, which represents the doctrine of ahimsa is also very important. The swastika, is their primary symbol, but not their only symbol. And a note should be made that the Jain swastika also has 3 dots and a candrabindu (ँ) atop it. I was given a link by a Jain friend months ago, but could not remember it. However the following link has the same information about the symbolism of the swastika in Jainism. The symbol shown is of course relatively new, but the symbols that it is comprised of are not. The Jain swastika can be seen on the Jain flag, though I'm not implying they don't use the basic swastika of the other dharmic religions as well. Also not even mentioned (I think) are the historical Persian use of the swastika during Noruz, and there is no mention of the Kuna people of Panama whose flag has a left facing swastika. I would normally add such info myself, but on such a naturally contentious article as this I'll consign myself to just offer these suggestions. Khirad 09:54, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: to think that we were called names by our anonymous Jain swastikophile only to find that he doesn't even know his own stuff. dab (ᛏ) 10:36, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Jainism

message: I am an avid aircraft modeller with no Nazi sympathy whatsoever. Occasionally I like to build a kit of a WWII German Luftwaffe aircraft. These, of course, have a Hakenkreuz on the tail. However, it is difficult to find kits that do not delete the swastika from the decal sheet because model manufacturers are scared of running afoul of European laws banning the swastika. I hardly think a kit of a Messerschmitt 109 with historically-accurate markings would cause someone to become a Hitlerite.--MarshallStack 21:47, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modelling 

message: About anyone who has done business on EBAY knows that they are VERY strict about not selling Nazi memorabilia. This also extends to plastic models. A couple of years ago I listed a couple of Luftwaffe decal sheets on EBAY that contained the swastika. I put a disclaimer in the item descriptions saying I intended no Nazi sympathy. However, EBAY removed the items and sent me a very stinging warning e-mail about violating their "no-Nazi" content policies.
However, they will sell English-language editions of "Mein Kampf". I don't get it.--MarshallStack 21:47, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  EBAY 

message: Doesn't the flag of the Syrian Social Nationalist Party features a swastika? It's a spinning
red swastika. If it's true, this information should be included in the article. Could someone do some research? CG 16:29, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Syrian Social Nationalist Party flag 

message: In India nowadays the right facing swastika is seen more commonly than the left facing one. However, I have always seen the left facing swastika used in Hindu rituals, never the right facing one. The left facing swastika is the traditional Hindu swastika. The right facing one seems to have now gradually imprinted itself in the minds of modern Indians, as it is the one most often seen in the media. So, Indians who are unaware of the significance, use either swastika they feel like in their decorations and Diwali festivities, however, knowledgeable Hindu priests use only the left facing swastika in religious ceremonies. The left facing swastika is the traditional Hindu symbol. The left facing swastika you see in India is the correct traditional one and not an error made by the sculptor or artist, as the article claims.
Hinduism places great significance to direction. There is indeed a belief that the right facing swastika is evil and the belief predates the Nazis. Is there any reference to support the claim in the article that the right facing swastika is the traditional Hindu symbol, rather than the left facing one? We cannot merely look at a few dozen depictions of the swastika in modern India and come to conclusions about Hindu beliefs based on which type occurs most often. What source says that the belief that the right facing swastika is evil did not exist before the Nazis and was manufactured only afterwards, as the article claims?
:I admit I find it hard to get definitive information on this. Some while ago we had a very dogmatic Jain contributor who insisted that the left facing design was "evil" (see discusions above), and is universally recognised as such in India. At the time I left a message on the Hinduism page asking for input on this from Hindu contributors, but none was forthcoming. We could really do with some knowledgable input here. The sources I am aware of date back to the swastika/sauwastika debate of the mid-nineteenth century (see sauwastika article), when a claim is made that the left facing design is inauspicious in some way. But later writers deny that. The whole thing gets further complicated by the Nazi use of the right-facing design, so that that orientation then came to be seen as "evil". Some occultists like to argue that the Nazis were in some mystical way invoking "dark forces" by their choice of this orientation. It seems that you agree with the view that the right-facing design is "evil". It would be very helpful if you could provide sources for this view. Who are these knowledgable "Hindu priests" who accept this view? What are the sources for this belief? Please please can we have some clear information on this matter rather than just assertions. All I can say for certain is that there was discussion among 19th century European scholars about this, and that I have seen images of ancient swastikas oriented both ways (some are reproduced in the article). Paul B 09:45, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: additional comment: the following passage was (in significant part) added by the Jain contributer. After I asked for comments it was left unchanged and has remained so ever since, but I must admit I've never been happy with its assertions about ignorant artists etc. "The left-facing swastika is generally regarded as evil in Hindu tradition. The much more common form in India is the right-facing swastika. Indians of all faiths rarely use the symbol in both orientations although Buddhists (outside India) can use the left-facing swastika. Sometimes, examples are said to be found of left-facing swastikas in India. These are invariably an unintended or ignorant mistake by the decorator or sculptor who created the left-facing swastika." Paul B 13:27, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Left faced swastikas are not generally preferred in India. deeptrivia 19:07, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. But is it considered to be "evil"? Even if not "evil", is it thought to be inauspicious? If so, do attitudes differ between traditions and cultures within India? Paul B 15:53, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

text:  I'm not sure, but I think it's just considered inauspiscious, or maybe just a mistake in drawing. deeptrivia (talk) 01:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hindu Swastika - left facing vs right facing 

message: The Columbia Sportswear Company logo seems to have a Swastika inside it sould it be added to this article?
:I think you would have to be searching for symbolism where none was intended to say there was a swastika in their logo. See e.g.  if you're not familiar with it. --Stormie 03:54, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This was a year ago, but I thought to add this to put this to rest:  -- the chairman of Columbia Sportswear, the founder's daughter, is a Jew that fled Nazi Germany. Marty4286 01:12, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Columbia Sportswear Company 

message: :But the notion that Adolf Hitler deliberately inverted the "good left-facing" swastika is wholly unsupported by any historical evidence
Should we also point out how silly this claim is since it suggests Adolf Hitler thought of himself and his actions as evil? Nil Einne 22:16, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't object if there is any evidence that this is true, which I rather doubt. Do you have sources for this idea? What "Asian(esque) traditionalist doubts and suspicians" do you mean? As far as I am aware the Asian population of Germany was virtually nil. Of course the Japs were later termed "honourary Aryans" during WW2, but Hitler had no reason to please the Japs back in the 1920s, and anyway the swastika does not, afaik, feature hugely in Japanese culture. It was a well established Aryanist symbol in the early 20th Cent. Paul B 11:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

text: In the 1920s Hitler did not envisage fighting the British Empire. In Mein Kampf he asserts that Germany and Britain should form a grand coalition. Even at the end of the war he was fantasising that the Brits and Americans would switch sides to fight the Bolshevik/Asian slavic hordes! Hitler's territorial ambitions were centred on Europe in line with Haushofer's geopolitics theories. Yes, there were some pro-Nazi Indian nationalists, but mostly the Indian army remained loyal to Britain during the war. post-war independence having been promised. Anyway, what matters is having published support for any theories presented here.Paul B 12:37, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

text: It is certainly a fact that the Indian National Army existed, but no-one is disputing that are they? It's still a fact that most troops formed part of British forces. The "theories" in question are your claim that Hirler used the swastika to "assuage Asian(esque) traditionalist doubts". There is no evidence for this that I know of. The swastika was the princpal Aryanist symbol prior to Hitler, already in use by proto-Nazi groups. Published support has nothing to do with "vanity" but with Wikipedia: No Original Research, a policy we must follow to minimise the problem of editors adding their own unsupported speculations. No-one has presented Hitler as a little-European, but his territorial projects are well laid out in Mein Kampf and in the Hossbach Memorandum. 
Hitler uses the term "Hakenkreuz" in Mein Kampf. The word "Swastika" appears here because we are using an english translation.Paul B 22:06, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Hitler

message: deleted from the overview:
:Hinduism shares with Nazism a belief  that some people are born superior to others. In Hindu opinions those of high Caste according to the Indian caste system are born superior to others of low caste.   Those who do not accept the Hindu concept of Karma are likely to feel the treatment of low cast Hindus and Dalits, (Untouchables) is grossly unjust.
Discussions of the caste system, and unsourced vaporings about how it's similar to Nazism, are quite inappropriate in this article. If someone wants to explain—with sources—that the Nazis found much to admire in the Hindu caste system, that they consciously modeled their racist policies after it, and that they chose the swastika because of this admiration of the caste system, that would be a welcome addition to the section on Nazi Germany, alongside the other theories. Material describing how some people are likely to feel about the caste system is best left to a separate article. —Charles P. (Mirv) 00:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem is that this is pretty marginal to "Swastika". It's much more relevant to the various "Aryan" articles, to the Indian caste system article itself, or even to Hinduism. It's also a fairly direct attack on Hinduism, and therefore provocatively POV. However, I've added a section on this theme to the Nazism part of the article. Paul B 15:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

text: this is entirely beside the point. This is an article about a symbol, and its uses throughout history. There is a reason we have wikilinks, and you may discuss the Indian caste system in depth over at Indian caste system. THe same goes for Racism and Eugenics, which have their own articles. dab (ᛏ)
 16:51, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: we are looking forward to that. Until you do have time, I don't see a reason for you to edit-war at this article. dab (ᛏ) 17:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  culled rant 

message: can we please clean out the insane amount of random images that are being added? We have :commons:Swastika for that. dab (ᛏ) 22:14, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We certainly don't need six different Polish versions of the motif. Paul B 16:18, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: yeah, we could just agree that it is a very common symbol, and that we don't need a snapshot of every instance in Eurasia. Imagine people spamming rectangle with every rectangle they could get in front of their lense. dab (ᛏ) 16:24, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

text: it's stupid anyway to talk of "clockwise" when this article itself advises against using the term on "Geometry and symbolism". Use "right-facing" or "left-facing" instead. dab (ᛏ) 21:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: that said, and contrary what the article claims, I maintain that "left facing" is at least as ambiguous as "clockwise". which arm faces "left" (the upper or the lower one?), and which is the "face" of the arm? if the arms are "trailing", the "face" is probably opposite to where it is if the arms are seen to be "leading". I can think of no easy solution to this except than have the article define unambiguously what terms it is going to use before actually using them. dab (ᛏ) 13:11, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Was wondering if this kind of disambig/classification helps: right-facing = the top most horizontal bar starts from the top-right corner (and top-left corner for left-facing)... It may help clarify the context of the term for the rest of the article, at least. --rgds. Miljoshi | <FONT style="color:#008000">talk</FONT> 10:10, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: image clutter

message: Some one removed some words about association of Swastika with Buddhism and Jainism - actually, he was wrong: so I reverted the edtis. I am giving two useful links:
*Swastika and Buddhism
*Swastika and Jainism
--Bhadani 08:40, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Swastika

message: Your reasoning for deleting my additions are quatsch.  The Nazi version of the swastika is counter-clockwise, and Falun Gong version is a clockwise rotating swastika.  Just because you do not know how to read the symbol does not mean you should restrict this information.  Also deleting what I said about the outward and inward focus of the swastikas is deleting an important belief about the swastika.  This is the interpritation of the swastika promoted by the Nazis, and needs to be known.
:Hi, the above contributor made two additions:
:1. "Clockwise or counter-clockwise refers to the implied rotation of the swastika; the Nazi swastika would be a counter-clockwise swastika, while the Falun Gong swastika would be a clockwise swastika." The problem with this is that it was inserted in the middle of a paragraph that was questioning the usefulness of the terms "clockwise or counter-clockwise" to the motifs - as is clearly illustrated in the captions to the images. The point is that the swastika does not actually move, so either design could be imagined to be rotating either way. This is also discussed on this talk page above. If you want to say that followers of Falun Gong interpret their version of the motif as "clockwise" that's fine. It would be desirable to link to evidence that this is so. 
:2. "The clockwise/counter-clockwise use of the swastika has its own symbolism. The counter-clockwise use of the swastika denotes an outward focus, and was said by the Nazis to represent the sun's rising in the east and its traversing westward across the sky. The clockwise symbolism of the swastika is to be interpreted as an inward focus." The problem here is that the "clockwise counterclockwise" language is repeated as fact again. Yes, it's true that there was a widespread view at the time that the different versions represented the rising and setting sun, but there is nothing especially "Nazi" about that view. However, if you can quote actual Nazi texts explaining their view of the symbolism that will be useful. Paul B 11:21, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Paul is absolutely right. Check the archives, we have spent enough time pondering this counter-clockwise/clockwise nonsense. Whatever terminology you decide to settle for, there is no orientation of the Swastika that is reserved to the Nazis. dab (ᛏ) 12:36, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: to Paul Barlow

message: searching the Perseus database, I found a number of coins, one of ca. 600 BC  and one of ca. 400 BC . There are also a number of vase images (about six), but the symbol is comparatively rare. Thus the Boioitian vase referred to above is really special, and we should maybe mention it (also with reference to the potnia theron. dab (ᛏ) 20:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Greek coins

message: As we know, Rex Curry is back again pushing his "S" for socialism theory. I wonder if we need to at least address the real evidence for socialist imagery in the Nazi flag, which is clearly articulated by Hitler "In red we see the social idea of the movement, in white the nationalistic idea, in the swastika the mission of the struggle for the victory of the Aryan man, and, by the same token, the victory of the idea of creative work, which as such always has been and always will be anti-Semitic." (Mein Kampf). It's clear from this that the red in the Nazi flag stands for socialism ("the social idea of the movement") appropriated from the traditional socialist Red Flag. The white stands for German Nationalism and the swastika for "Aryan man". There is a very faint hint that the cross piece might be seen as an S, signifying "sieg", but it's barely perceptible. There is no hint at all that it signifies socialism since Hitler has already said that the red stands for that. Paul B 14:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Socialist Swastika

message: I have removed this sentence from the article's Other Asian traditions  section:
The Chinese character 卐 has developed into the modern one 方, pronounced fāng in Standard Mandarin, and has the main meaning of "square".
as it is unsourced and probably untrue: the Chinese character 方 long predates the influx of Buddhism in China.  --Pkchan 05:19, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese character 

message: In Serbian language, svastika means "wife's sister". Little thing associated with well-being, indeed! :))) Nikola 21:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Offtopic comment on etymology 

message: With such an important article I don't want to tamper with the opening paragraph unannounced, but it doesn't specify anywhere in the first sentence that it has anything to with religion or spirituality, and then just states the following out of the blue
:the Hindu version is often decorated with a dot in each quadrant.
Does this seem improper to anyone else?
elvenscout742 23:21, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair point. I've rearranged the text. Paul B 23:33, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening... 

message: Offtopic thingy just for fun: 
On a more serious note, maybe we should incorporate something about the "arboreal swastika" planted by Hitlerites in 1938... 
-- Миборовский U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 04:43, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The US Navy Swastika building 

message: This bit of information may be useful for those interested in swastikas used in trade logos and the history and attitudes of the peoples of the Pacific Northwest. I have an artifact - a concrete utility sink - with a swastika logo on it. 
The swastika is in the center of an oval logo impression made into the front center of the sink. The oval is 8 inches across and 4 inches high. The swastika is 2 inches across, right facing and "square" (not tilted). Within the oval and following its curve are the words "Washington" and "Charcrete Co." above and below the swastika respectively. To the left of the swastika within the oval is the word "Trade".
The question that is interesting to me is whether the company chose to use the swastika out of inclinations toward the nazi mind set or for other reasons. This question could be addressed by dating the companies use of the symbol.
I have not found any evidence of a date on the sink. The sink was some of the "garbage" found in our house in Seattle Washington USA when we moved in. The house dates to 1910, but was reportedly moved to its current location sometime later (but before 1938). Of course, the sink may have come into the house at a later date.
Perhaps there is someone out there with first hand knowledge of the Washington Charcrete Co.?
67.170.101.112 19:04, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that that would be an interesting bit of trivia and would add to the value of the article. If I come across something, I'll mention it. --DanielCD 22:07, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swastika in trade logo 

message: This seems one of two things: either it is the ultimate example of how something can get 'lost in translation,' or it is a deliberate attempt to appeal to an international audience. 'Swastika' has clear Indian connotations, whereas part and parcel of Hitler's Nazi 'mission' was to expunge evidence of foreign influence in the German language. Relevant here (but unknown at this point in time) is the degree of liberty enjoyed by the English translator(s) - obeying Nazi orders?; or independently seeking to advise of content in the simplest, most understandable terms? Unfortunately, translating Hakenkreuz as 'swastika' would give, at the time, thru English, a completely misleading impression of an eclectic linguistic cosmopolitanism, and has the current effect of stigmatising a word from a sub-continent where, paradoxically, the symbol is associated with harmlessness. Etaonsh 07:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translation of ' ''Hakenkreuz'' ' as 'swastika' in English ''Mein Kampf'' 

message: I see that there has already been much discussion about the etymology of the Sanskrit word "svastika," but changes are merited.  These are the ones I propose, which I'll make unless they raise dissent on the talk page: 
First, the root (Skt. "dhaatu") "as" does not mean "to be," it means "is, be"; Sanskrit has a true infinitive, so this is important.  
Second, a brief mention should be made of the phonological rule of assimilation (Skt. "sandhi") that causes the prefix "su" and the noun "asti" to form the praadisamaasa compound "svasti," namely, that before a vowel, "u" shifts to its homologous semivowel "v."  
Third, it would be worthwhile to indicate that the word "asti" is a primary derivative (Skt. "k.rt pratyaya") of the dhaatu "as," using the common suffix "ti," (e.g. "gati" from the dhaatu "gam," "mukti" from the dhaatu "muc," etc.), which should set to rest the idea that the "asti" in question here is the 3rd pers. sing. present indicative, which it is not; it is a noun.  
Fourth, and most importantly, the suffix "ka" is not always a diminutive, and it is not functioning as such here: it is an agentive marker.  True, the taddhita pratyaya (secondary suffix) "ka" _can_ indicate a diminutive sense, but it can also indicate bahuvriihi usage, and most frequently it is an agentive marker.  For instance, when applied to the noun "ruupam" (form), the "ka" suffix creates the word "ruupaka" ("form-making," or "metaphor"). 
So, for svastika, here is the full derivation: k.rt pratyaya of "ti" is appended to the dhaatu "as" to form the noun "asti" ("being").  Adding the prefix "su" ("good") results in the praadisamaasa "svasti" ("wellbeing").  Adding the taddhita pratyaya "ka" results in the agentive noun "svastika" ("[something that] creates wellbeing").  Bmani 00:36, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: it is conventional to give English infinitives as root meanings, if you understand the term root, this is without consequence. Discussion of sandhi seems over the top for the purposes of this article, this not being an article on Sanskrit morphology. I very much agree with your third point, and have repeatedly removed the "3rd person" mistake in the past, but I think this is made sufficiently clear in "western" terminology in " asti a verbal abstract to the root as", I don't think there is a need to confuse the reader with the equivalent term k.rt pratyaya (although it would of course be entirely correct to use it). Your final point is very valid too, and ka is the only of the four morphemes (su-as-ti-ka) that may be open to debate. I don't have Wackernagel ready just now, but I think it would be a good idea to say that ka has various functions. Bottom line, I would support edits adressing your fourth point. dab (ᛏ) 17:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: thanks for looking at this.  I cringe to see dhaatus cited as infinitives in English, since the stasis implied by a verbal root was to become such an interesting philosophical question for "Sa~nkara, but of course take your point.  Blasted English with its lack of a true infinitive.  Similarly, I suppose the other questions of how deeply one wants to explore the Sanskrit etymology of the term depends on the view of readership; as someone who strongly supports widening the audience of Sanskrit grammar, I tend towards the Sanskrit end but that's a matter of opinion.  Wackernagel's "Altindische Grammatik"?  Do you also use Böhtlingk's "Panini's Grammatik"?  Volume II in particular is enormously useful. Bmani 22:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I cordially invite you to contribute in any depth of detail at Astadhyayi, Dhatupatha, Ganapatha, Sandhi and Sanskrit grammarians, articles that have long been up for expansion. dab (ᛏ) 06:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: etymology

message: I am removing the reference to the "Forced occupation" of Finland by Nazi Germany, since none such took place. I refer to the article Continuation War, for instance. Also, it is not strictly true that the swastika has been replaced by a roundel in all instances (for instance the medals mentioned in the same paragraph) so I do not think the rest of the sentence is very accurate either.
If Finland was not forcibly occupied by Nazi Germany, as you suggest, then what was the Lapland War all about, then? Etaonsh 06:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: German troops were in Lapland by agreement of Finland. After Finland made peace with Soviet Union, the later demanded to declare war against Germany. That was Lapland War. --Thule 23:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Occupation of Finland

message: Please fix the error which suggests that the Swastika was introduced to India by Indian kings. As a historian, as well as enthusiast regarding this subject, the Swastika was introduced to India by the Old Persians along side the Sanskrit language. Infact the earliest Sanskrit writings found in the world are in Iran (Persia), as well as shards using the Swastika symbol, were found in Northeren Iran, dating back 5000 bc. There are also thousands of documented writings demonstrating how the swastika was introduced to India along side the introduction of the Sanskrit language.
:The traditional view was certainly that the swastika is an Indo-Iranian motif, but the Elamite and IVC discoveries suggest that its presence pre-dates Indo-Iranian culture in the area (though of course similar shapes used thousands of years apart do not necessarily imply continuity of symbolism). Northern Iran in 5000BC was not a Sanskrit speaking culture. You also seem to be conflating Elamites and Iranians. We have to be careful how we define cultures, and avoid pointless nationalist arguing over who had it first. But we also have to represent different points of view. BTW, new discussions should be placed at the bottom of the page. Paul B 10:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find any reference to the 5000BC date, which seems rather early! Where did you get this date? Paul B 11:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, you seem to have got the date from here,  , cutting and pasting the passage complete with "1020" reference, but this is the only source I can find  - after a quick search - with this date, and the passage that includes it seems odd. Paul B 11:27, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

text: Your first link is the same as the one I have already posted as your likely source. The second one says nothing about 5000BC. My guess is that the first link is copied from the second (many paragraphs are identical) with some idiosyncratic material - including the 5000BC date - being added. Possibly the date is a misunderstanding from a comment somewhere about it being possibly 5000 years old. But maybe not. We shall await the information you have requested! Regarding the history of Iranian languages, you might want to read Elam, Indo-Iranians, Proto-Indo-European. Very few people believe that an Iranian language existed in 5000BC. Paul B 17:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

text: So why does that mean it isn't really a swastika? Paul B 00:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Introduction of the Swastika to India

message: The description for the photograph is misleading. The swastika like symbol shown on the flag is not really a swastika, but it denotes the mark that will be cast on the ballot paper when a vote is cast. When this mark is depicted on the flag, it merely conveys that the sickle and hammer is official election symbol (ballot papers in South Asia have symbols for the contesting parties) for the communist party.
:So why does that mean it isn't really a swastika? Paul B 00:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Misleading Photograph description

message: The section on a Californian shop - if it is noteworthy enough to  occupy as much space as it does - needs referencing. TheGrappler 03:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  White King Soap 

message: I have a question concerning the use of swastika's on for example, video game covers, book covers or film posters. I thought the public display/use of these symbols was banned or restricted in most countries. Philip K Dick's "The Man in the High Castle" has this famous cover art , but I was wondering in what countries (if any at all) this is legal and if so under what guidelines. --Steerpike 17:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the display of the swastika in virtually any form is prohibited in Germany; beyond that, I don't know, aside from that there's no prohibition on its display in the United States (although it's considered highly distasteful). --Emufarmers(T/C) 13:10, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of the swastika prohibited? 

message: Eh, what is the purpose of that cartoon? Looks a bit POV. Medico80 19:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In what way? It's simply illustrating the use of the swastika to make political points. The article does not endorse the point that the catoonist is making about Danish politicians. Paul B 23:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cartoon?

message: New Mexico State University named it's yearbook the Swastika in 1912 after the Native American symbol used throughout the region.  It dropped the name in 1968, but retained the symbol on it's cover till the 1980's.
Loki-dog 15:49, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Mexico State University Yearbook 

message: Removed the following paragraph as it is entirely unsourced and IMO not very encyclopedic in its wording:
:As a mystical image, the swastika is often seen in a "vision" as a field of equal "perfect crosses" in rotation, the outer portion of the arms being seen as after images that are seen like the tips of rotating aircraft propellers or fan blades in videos. The direction of rotation seen by the person having the vision is considered to be indicative of the direction of their spiritual movement as either ascendant toward the Light or descendent toward the Darkness. The most auspicious such "vision" is when the person having the "vision" discovers that they can choose through "essential will" (as compared to mechanistic "ego will") and change the direction of rotation first one way, then reverse and then back again. This is considered to be an indication of spiritual maturation and self-responsibility."
The description of these "visions" could potentally be interesting if anyone can find corroborating sources, presumably from some spiritual discipline; but "is considered to be" doesn't cut it.  — Xaonon (Talk) 03:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good move. Paul B 10:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geometry and symbolism 

message: the website claims the translation is provided by the Federal Ministry of Justice of Germany
I believe Section 86a(2) is especially relevant as in "Symbols which are so similar as to be mistaken for those..." and the previously seen 86(2) with "...serves to further civil enlightenment, to avert unconstitutional aims..." -- ExpImptalkcon 00:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  found on [http://www.iuscomp.org/gla/statutes/StGB.htm iuscomp.org] 

message: Would the Finland swastika's be illegal in Germany? It's not a religious symbol nor is it for scholarly purposes. Nil Einne 20:44, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am no lawyer, but i am quite sure it is illegal, for the reasons you mentioned yourself.-- ExpImptalkcon 16:42, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  German law 

message: I reverted some recent edits () to the intro which changed "swastika" to "swastik", but made the first sentence hard to understand. This just seems like a transliteration issue, but since it was a good faith edit I'm letting you guys know in case you want to use it in any way. Rampart 03:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert 

message: Here's a link to a recent NYT article (abstract) regarding a forest swastika in Kyrgizstan. I wasn't able to find a photo, however. Apparently, there's much uncertainty about whether it was planted by German POW slave laborers or by others. Does anyone have any independent info on this?
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30E14FC38550C758DDDA00894DE404482
Sca 15:02, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The full article is here: . By the way: We already have an article about Forest swastika.-- ExpImptalkcon 16:47, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: have a look at the thing:  If that's a swastika, I'm the Queen of England..-- ExpImptalkcon 16:59, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Eki Naryn swastika

message: Was the swastika used to represent the sun?
:some people claim this. it's speculation. dab (𒁳) 08:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of the swastika as a symbol of the sun 

message: Everyone agrees that Hitler misused an ancient and beautiful Swastika symbol. It is understandable that Jews are allergic to the symbol. A historical blunder of a lunatic cannot be reason to wipe out this symbol from day-to-day usage. Europeans should feel proud of their ancient symbol and resurrect it in Europe and other continents where they settled.
i.m putting upminster bridge tube station in the list, if theres a swimmin pool in san diego there can be that station Joevsimp 09:36, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Resurrect Swastika in Europe & Americas

message: From opinioneditorials.com:
:"Wikipedia announces discoveries from Opinion Editorials & the historian Dr. Rex Curry"
::by Rex Curry
:"Wikipedia is helping to announce amazing discoveries that first appeared on OpinionEditorials.com in a recent article by the noted historian Dr. Rex Curry..."
:"Wikipedia is known as an online encyclopedia. The Wiki article repeats information from the Opinion Editorials article by Dr. Curry under the title "Swastika," with the sub heading "Russia." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Russia ..."
I see Mr. Curry or a friend was also active at the Bellamy salute article. . See also User talk:Rexcurrydotnet. --A. B. 02:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh dear. I thought Rex had finally gone, but no... Paul B 09:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually Rex is presenting the information in his characteristically distorted way to support his eccentric theory of the "socialist" meaning of the symbol, by claiming that the Bolshevik revolutionry government used the swastika in 1917. In fact it was the liberal "provisional government" of Kerensky that used the symbol on banknotes. There is a lot of evidence of this - you can even buy the notes on ebay - so it's hardly a "discovery" of Rex's. However, for some reason the reference to these notes has now been deleted from the article. Paul B 12:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I believe it was removed because it was unsourced, and the mere fact that Rex Curry claims support from it does place it under a cloud of suspicion ;-) — Matt Crypto 12:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Re the citation regarding Rosenberg - yes, it's not the best source, since it seems to be a neo-Nazi website. It was just the first one that came up. I'll look for a better one. Paul B 12:54, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Cheers, that would be great. We'd ideally want a peer-reviewed source. — Matt Crypto 13:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm still looking, but most of the stuff that makes the connection with Rosenberg is depressingly fringy, though there's nothing obviously silly about the idea of such a connection. Paul B 11:46, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Wikipedia announces discoveries from Opinion Editorials & the historian Dr. Rex Curry" 

message: The aside "Unfortunately" in the summary sentence noting the Western connotations at the start of this article seems POV-biased to me. I'm removing it. I'm not a Nazi.
Samois98 09:18, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV in Header Paragraphs 

message: There are several pictures of penises!--64.121.1.55 02:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  HUGE VANDALISM! 

message: the article is again longer than 100k! do we really need full citation of German laws in the article body?? It was reasonably slim when featured, and we should weed out clutter by comparison to the featured version. dab (𒁳) 13:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: reduced to 79k by exporting the incredibly cluttery "Early 20th century" section to Western use of the Swastika in the early 20th century. dab (𒁳) 14:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

text: down to 66k after exporting the obsessively detailed "Ceramic tiles" report to the same article (which is now up to 36k). dab (𒁳) 14:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I removed some more. If notable examples are worked into the prose to illustrate some point, that's fine, but most of them were obviously just added in by passers-by, at more or less random points of the article. dab (𒁳) 13:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: argh, cleanup

message: There are still a number of nuggets of information left in the main article.
:I removed some more. If notable examples are worked into the prose to illustrate some point, that's fine, but most of them were obviously just added in by passers-by, at more or less random points of the article. dab (𒁳) 13:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Should all references to Western use of swastika use in early 20th century be moved? 

message: From the article:  "The swastika is, after the simple equilateral cross (the 'Greek cross'), the next most commonly found version of the cross."  I seriously doubt this is true.  What about the Latin cross?  I left the sentence in the article (since I'm not sure), but added a "citation needed" tag to it.  RobertAustin 15:26, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: we should remove that, it is obviously just pulled out of thin air. How are you ever going to establish something like that. dab (𒁳) 19:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 2nd most common form of the cross?

message: In the section about the swastika in Europe in the early 20th century, would it be a good idea to include the following info from the article about Rudyard Kipling? I have several volumes of Kipling from my great-grandfather's library which have the swastikas imprinted on the covers.  I have seen several over-reactions in relation to these books in the past, (e.g. "Why don't you throw these in a fire!?" ) and want to help make sure this info is as widely available as possible to prevent the destruction or defacement of innocent books.
Quote:
The swastika
Covers of two of Kipling's books from 1919 (l) and 1930 (r)
Many older editions of Rudyard Kipling's books have a swastika printed on their covers associated with a picture of the elephant-headed Hindu god Ganesha, which since the 1930s has raised the possibility of Kipling being mistaken for a Nazi-sympathiser. Kipling's use of the swastika, however, was based on the sign's ancient Indian meaning of good luck and well-being. He used the swastika symbol in both left and right facing orientations. Even before the Nazis came to power, Kipling ordered the engraver to remove it from the printing block so that he should not be thought of as supporting them. Less than one year before his death Kipling gave a speech (titled "An Undefended Island") to The Royal Society of St George on 6 May 1935 warning of the danger Nazi Germany posed to Britain.[32]
Atomicangelfish 00:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of the material about non-Nazi Swastika imagery in the 2oth century was moved to Western use of the Swastika in the early 20th century. Paul B 07:25, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rudyard Kipling and the Swastika 

message: repeatedly, the claim of the swastika being a "holy symbol" of "Odinism", Germanic religion or "Old European" religion is being sneaked in. This is a claim by some neopagan groups, not an established fact. All that we can say is that swastika shapes appear as ornaments, among any number of other ornaments, on pre-Christian European (Germanic as well as non-Germanic) artefacts. We can name one Runestone (out of some 6,000) sporting a swastika motif. The Sun cross is different here, there is indeed evidence that this (a cross in a circle) was a solar symbol of some religious significance in (pre-Germanic, pre-Celtic!) Bronze Age Europe (see prehistoric religion). Claims that identify the swastika as a 'variant' of the Sun cross need specific sources (that is, academic/archaeologist, not neopagan internet sites). dab (𒁳) 09:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Odinism" in this context refers to the neopagan religion, not to actual ancient Germanic cults. I doubt that it is notable enough to be flagged up at the beginning alonmg with the great Dharmic religions, but it's not a claim about ancient culture, but modern culture. Paul B 13:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: well, the implication that the neopagan symbol has a historical precedent in Germanic paganism keeps coming up. I don't get this, since swastika shapes are rather rare in Iron Age Celtic/Germanic artefacts, sometimes people go out of their way to classify anything remotely spirally or cross-shaped as "variants" of the swastika. I guess some people are just slightly obsessed with the symbol. There are known pre-Christian religious symbols, such as the Valknut or the Sun cross or the Triskele, but these are simply not "gammadion" symbols. Of course they are "similar", but that makes them just specimens of a much larger class of designs with rotational symmetry of which the swastika is just another example. dab (𒁳) 13:21, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Germanic/Old European

message: Dab, you removed my edit in the Swastika article which stated that "Swastika is also a very popular name among Hindus and particularly among Bengalis. " stating that "the article stresses the importance of the symbol in Hinduism/Buddhism only about twelve dozen times over so far..." - this is true, for the symbol, but my point was that nowhere in the article does it say it is also a very popular persons name among Hindus particularly among Bengalis, I could be mistaken if I have missed it and for that I apologise but I cannot see a reference. I added this into the article because their was no disambiguation page for Swastika. Robert C Prenic 09:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your new edit, thanks. Robert C Prenic 09:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Should there be a disambiguation page? I see there's a Swastika, Ontario location, a Swastika (Slade) book, a Forest swastika, and there's a popular name of Swastika? Obviously this would be the main page, but do you think we need a "For other uses, see ..."? --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 21:54, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Swastika Name not just Symbol

message: Reading the article on the Swastika, I was dismayed to see that the Raelian Movement is described as a religious "cult".
Taking into account all the pejorative connotations of this term, I think it is in very bad taste to call the Raelian Movement a cult.
Furthermore, in your own guidelines, you state "Neutral Point of View"... Calling a group of people a cult (or sect), is hardly a Neutral Point of View. It encourages discrimination and hatred towards a group of people who belong to a minority religious faith.
As a member of the Raelian Movement for more than 20 years, I think it is high time that at least sites like Wikipedia which are open to editing by everyone, can truly be a Neutral and verifiable source of information.
The Charter of Human Rights, grants to all individuals the freedom to choose their faith and to be respected whatever their choice.
Calling the Raelian Movement a "cult" in Wikipedia or in any other place is a breach of the Human Rights of the individuals.
If the traditional media, many of whom are related to politicians, big religious organizations and corporations, use their power to reach the masses to insult and discriminate against those who are not like them, we should not follow their example. How are we to improve this world we live in and make it a more fair place for everyone if we imitate those who try to censure and guide our thoughts and actions?
But Wikipedia is different. It is supposed to be a planetary database of information which should not discriminate against anyone, regardless of their creed, race, or whatever.
Elo
wehemesut@gmail.com
*... Where does it say "cult" anywhere in the article? --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 18:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It said sect, not cult. Nowhere in WP:NPOV does it state that this word is unacceptable. Paul B 18:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Words to avoid (which is not policy but based on NPOV) does state sect should generally be avoided because of varying meanings amongst other things Nil Einne 16:31, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Raelian Movement & Neutral Point of View guidelines 

message: I replaced 
"The Finnish Air Force received its first airplane in 1918 as a gift from Swedish Count Eric von Rosen. The plane was adorned with swastikas as good luck symbols. Thereafter, a blue von Rosen swastika was adopted as the nationality marking on the Finnish Air Force planes." 
with 
"It is a common misbelief that the swastika would have become to Finnish use at 6 March 1918, when Eric von Rosen transported an airplane, adorned with swastikas as good luck symbols from Sweden to Finnish white army. However, artist Akseli Gallen-Kallela had already plans about the use of swastika before the given date. The swastika was officially adopted as the nationality marking on the Finnish Air Force planes at 18 March 1918."
since the upper story is false, according to Finnish wikipedia and plenty of other sources. My spelling might be a bit awkward, so feel free to edit it. 88.115.14.24 14:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please use references. It's still very common belief. --Zzzzzzzzzz 21:38, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Finnish swastika's original 

message: I have removed this section since it seems to have almost no relevance to the article, beyond Walker's claim that these courts used - in some unspecified way - a "double swastika", whatever that may be. This claim seems to be a tendentious attempt to link real or alleged medieval antisemitism to Nazism. Some admirer of these courts has added an unreferenced defence of them, which is no more than a series of assertions supported by mention of a novel. Better out that in, I think. Paul B 15:20, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Medieval Vehmic courts

message: It's that old it should be open source. I can imagine it must have been taken by an employee of the united states aif forces. I've never seen an US-Army aeroplain with a swastika bevore. Byzanz 10:59, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's best to check the source of the image. If you want to use it would be better placed in the article Western use of the Swastika in the early 20th century. Paul B 12:54, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Can we use this photo?

message: I find it amazing that there are still people who question where the Swastika originated from. I mean the oldest major religion is Hinduism, and Hinduism uses the swastika, so common sense means that it is fair to say that it may have originated out of Hinduism....71.119.255.31 21:02, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It may be the oldest major religion, but that does not mean the swastika originated from hinduism. You seem to be assuming that the symbol has to have originated from religion which makes little sense. Indeed you seem to be assuming not just any religion but a major religion. But it's just as easily possible it originated from an early minor religion, and was then subsumed into Hinduism. Or alternatively, it may have originated outside religion or arisen multiple times (as the article suggests) Nil Einne 16:24, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Swastika originated out of Hinduism 

message: Here in Wikipedia is the first time I ever saw that the "clockwise" direction of the swastika (the right-facing) is mentioned as "ambiguous". I think that it is not the movement of the cross what is meant for "clockwise", but the bending of the arms (from the center). At least, it should be mentioned that usually (I rather say universally, but well...) the clockwise swastika refers to the right-facing one. Nazroon 15:52, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clockwise vs Counterclockwise 

message: This is a query regarding the image shown on the page referring to the communist party in Nepal using the Swastika. 
I know that in India the shape of the stamp used in elections, to indicate the choice (no hanging chads) is similar to that of a Swastika.
So I was wondering I was wondering if it had anything to do with the symbol for "vote" rather than any religious or cultural connotations. As in "vote for the sickle and hammer"
(/) I bet both Stalin and Hitler would've loved that by the way(/sarcasm off)
:Did you read the section on South Asia in addition to looking at the image? 16:19, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use by Communists in Nepal 

message: I just noticed that the Chinese version of the page uses 卐 as its title, so it's actually a part of their modern computer character set. Does anyone have a list of encodings or languages that have the 卐 or 卐-like symbol in it, and if it has been approved by western authorities like the IETF, IEEE, etc.? I recall there were a few fonts that had a  卐 and raised controversy, but I'm asking about actual encoding standards for characters. Identity0 03:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps reading the article will help? The current version mentions several instances of the swastika in the unicode character set. Nil Einne 16:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern computer character encodings 

message: The statement "the Akan civilization of southwest Africa may have been the result of cultural transfer along the African slave routes around AD 1500", does not make very much sense. What 'the African slave routes' are is unclear. If the article is refering to the Atlantic Slave Trade, which did not begin until plantations requiring African slave labor were established in the 'New World' colonies in the 1600's and not 'around 'AD 1500', then from which culture was the swastika transfered from, an African culture, European, Native American? The implications are that the Akan could not have produced this symbol independently or needed to have it 'transfered' under European stewardship in the form of the African Slave Trade. 
Archaeological and historical evidence has clearly shown that the use of the swastika in Akan culture predates the presence of Europeans in Africa let alone on the coast of what is today the Republic of Ghana. When the Portuguese arrived in 1471 they observed the use of brass/bronze weights among the Akan for weighing gold dust, which was their currency before European arrival. Excavations among the ruins of an ancient town in the Ashanti region found weights of the type that is dominated by the swastika. The ruins were dated between the 13th-15th century (1200's-1400's). please see: Recent excavations of Adansemanso by clicking on the following link: http://cohesion.rice.edu/CentersAndInst/SAFA/emplibrary/46_ch09.pdf
Even if the Portuguese had introduced the symbol immediately upon arrival on the coast in 1471, it is highly improbable that it would have been integrated by the Akan in an art form and an economic system that predated the Portuguese and in which the Portuguese were a marginal factor until the 16th century; the Portuguese were traders not colonizers on the coast and were only relevant or influential in that regard. Further, the excavated weights were found in the interior of the Akan area. The Portuguese never made it beyond the coast unless they were ivited guests, which was rare, at best, for any European until the 18th century at which time Portuguese influence & usefulness had diminished considerably along the coast.
:I know nothing about Akan swastikas, but cultural transfer from the Portugese seem an unlikely theory - since it wasn't of great signifance in Europe at the time. Paul B 00:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the section altogether, since it was unreferenced. Your citation is not informative about the swastika motif, but if you have specific information feel free to add it. I've had a quick look around at some Akan weights. There are a lot of sworl-like and geometrical shapes, some of which resemble swastikas. I've seen some out-and-out swastikas, but they seem to date from the 19th C. It wouldn't be surprising if there were earlier examples, since it's just a geometrical pattern. Claims about sun-symbolism would need to more clearly supported, since this kind of interpretation is typical of the early 20th C. Paul B 08:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Akan civilization of Ghana and the Swastika