Talk:Georg Forster/Archive 2

message: They are sourced and show how contradictory his public views were with beliefs expressed in private life, also we should make clear distinction between his views  being seen as supportive of inferiority of Poles during German Empire and his views being seen as supportive of the theory that Poles were subhuman in Third German Reich, right now the sentences combine the two.A distinction should be made.Also since we have the quotes, I see why they shouldn't be put into place.Seems to a bit of an effort to present him only in a way that won't mention his rather negative sides.
--Molobo 01:03, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We are describing Forster's negative sides. The formulation used to do so can probably be improved. However, we should not describe his views as "racist". The concept of racism emerged only more than 50 years after his death. To give the quotes justice, they would have to be put in context, which would expand the section about his views on Poles totally out of proportion (among other things, we would have to include the good things Forster said about Poland). Since Georg Forster's letters were not used in a very prominent way in either the German Empire or the Third Reich, I think the current description has the right balance, since we do mention this problematic side of Forster's which, however, is far from being the most important part of his legacy. If the discussion about Forster's posthumous influence on anti-Polish sentiment is to be done in more detail, IMHO the better place for that would be Anti-Polonism. Kusma (討論) 01:56, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, indeed, we can for instance add an adjective "incivil" to underline the strength of the expressions. In order to add racism to the article we would need a wider support for the view - not just a side remark that his statements were "imbued with racist aspects". This statement of the Berleigh, Burleigh book is far from the evidence that Forster held the view that human species can meaningfully be divided into races. Note also that the Berleigh, Burleigh book is presented as a footnote in the article close to the place where the Nazi Germany is mentioned so everybody who is interested can read more about the issue. alx-pl D 14:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

text: This is not enough in this case as this is a strong ideological accusation and this is an encyclopedia where the statements must be balanced, not an advocacy forum. alx-pl D 00:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

text: See the comment above. This is an encyclopedia. One should present facts in a  sympathethic way, as WP:NPOV#Fairness and sympathetic tone states: If we're going to characterize disputes fairly, we should present competing views with a consistently positive, sympathetic tone. There is a descriptive information on his attitude to Poland and Poles + reference to the source articles. Mentioning the quotes would require a longer description of the context which would in turn be very out of balance. alx-pl D 00:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

text: How can you discriminate these private confessions he made from quite common educative approach of quite many adults in which they call some children "pigs" when the children eat in a clumsy manner. Or when a married couple has an argument, they also quite often call one another "you pig" (as for instance in this dialogue). Are these people racist, too? alx-pl D 00:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

text: That's fine. We can for instance change "such contempt" into "his prejudices against Poles". alx-pl D 00:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Why are quotes removed

message: The passage:
:The rise of the nationalist ideas at the end of the 18th and in the 19th century resulted in him and his cosmopolitan ideas being nowhere welcome. For Englishmen he was a proud Prussian who started conflicts, for Germans he was too unpatriotic being willing to give away part of his fatherland to France, and for French people he was not significant enough politically.
has been removed due to possible POV/OR suspection. Basically, the sentence
* The rise of the nationalist ideas at the end of the 18th and in the 19th century resulted in him and his cosmopolitan ideas being nowhere welcome.
is just a summary of the last paragraphs in the paper by Pauline Kleingeld which is mentioned in the bibliography (starting with With the exception of Friedrich Schlegel's version of international...) The content in the second sentence may be regarded as POV/OR, but still there is some evidence in the sources which can support that. It is the matter of good will to add the information. If you think it makes sense, I can gather the support for that and we will see if it's legitimate to include the information. However, I am not going to insist on reintroduction of that information. Still, the information from the first sentence is an information I consider to be crucial for the section. alx-pl D 12:39, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I put in back the first sentence. The rest needs to be polished a bit for style or (possibly) turned into a direct quote from the article, I think (I won't object into adding some part of it again). As we have a reference, and can cite that directly, the claim of OR is of course wrong, but to address Molobo's concerns we should make it clear that this is Kleingeld's research. Kusma (討論) 14:54, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last remarks on cosmopolitanism 

message: Simpe information provided by Kusma-mainly that the focus on Forster's description of Poles was  they were pigs. As of yet they were only slight sentences without any information that would inform the reader what the exact terms were.
--Molobo 01:26, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've said what I had to say already, and am not interested in repeating myself right now. And I won't revert your edits again today as I have partially reverted you three times already. I still don't agree with you. Please try to be fair and try to use a better argument then "but he said Poles are animals" which misses the point. I can provide some good things Forster said about Poland if you wish. Kusma (討論) 02:21, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

text: As for the point you mention here, you did not answer my question before: How can you discriminate these private confessions he made from quite common educative approach of quite many adults in which they call some children "pigs" when the children eat in a clumsy manner. Or when a married couple has an argument, they also quite often call one another "you pig" (as for instance in this dialogue). Are these people racist, too? alx-pl D 16:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: I added

message: Why is he stated as German  ? The article again contradicts itself-he was born in Poland, with Scotish ancestors, never felt like Pole, yet Germans rejected him.
Please discuss.
--Molobo 13:12, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He is universally known as a German in every source we have. Nobody but you has disputed his nationality. I don't see anything worth discussing here. Kusma (討論) 15:03, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ideed, for instance in the mentioned above article by Gordon A. Craig it is stated: Among the intellectual leaders of the German states during the period of the French Revolution, the political geographer and natural philosopher Georg Forster occupies a special place. Similarly, the source you used before reads: German officials [...] and travelers as Johann Georg Forster. Of course, the question of his nationality may be disputable, as the nations in our current understanding have not emerged at that time and thus it was not customary to confess nationality at that time. I doubt we can find a clear statement of his that declares nationality. The most convincing argument for the choice of his nationality is probably the language of his diaries. It was German  which can be for instance deduced from the fact that they were published in the German series Deutsche Litteraturdenkmale des 18. und 19. Jahrhunderts in Neudrucken (in English: German literature monuments of 18th and 19th centuries in new prints). alx-pl D 17:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed=Nationality

message: I have made a request in Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal to resolve the dispute. This is the first step to take as Wikipedia:Resolving disputes suggests. alx-pl D 19:41, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resolution 

message: Nassenhuben records were removed from article, therefore posted here: Nassenhuben Official Records of Inhabitants 
Georg Forster was born in Landkreis Danziger Niederung in a small village, named Nassenhuben in Prussia  (aka Royal Prussia). Nassenhuben was the property of the noble family of Schwartzenberg  until its annexation by the Kingdom of Prussia in 1772. Earlier Nassenhuben was known as Mutterstrenz.
In 1660 Professor Daniel Ernst Jablonski was also born in Nassenhuben, Danziger Niederung.
MG 4/8/2006
--------------
:Those are the records of the Protestant church, so almost by definition German and using the German name. (Catholic records would probably be in Polish). What does this prove, though, and how does this really relate to this article? You should get an account and write an article about Mokry Dwor if you want to present this. Kusma (討論) 21:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was Poland according to :de:Teilungen Polens and according to Georg Forster's own words. (in a letter quoted in the article by Bömelburg, he says "Ich bin ja in Polen, bei Danzig, geboren").  Kusma (討論) 21:42, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

text: Your point in relation to this article being...? Kusma (討論) 23:21, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nassenhuben, Danziger Niederung records 

message: You'll need better inline citations to get featured, but looks good enough for a GA tag. Keep up the good work. savidan(talk) (e@) 10:10, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: GA