Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Archive 4

message: jmabel, can you provide wikilinks to pages containing the sort of templates that you would like to employ here? tks --Ling.Nut 21:37, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm lacking context on that question: templates for what purpose? (& if you are directing a question specifically to me, you'll get a lot faster answer if you also hit my user talk page with a link to it: I have thousands of pages on my watchlist.) - Jmabel | Talk 01:29, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll copy the project page to my user space and try to remodel bit by bit over the next few weeks/months... but as Jmabel said, "...I'd be thrilled if someone else who knows what they are doing carries the ball sooner."--Ling.Nut 13:31, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  template examples? 

message: See discussion here: Wikipedia_talk:Africa-related_regional_notice_board#Free_books. - Francis Tyers · 14:15, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Free books

message: Hi,
#I tried to avoid "doubling up" on WikiProjects. If I accidentally placed a tag on an article that was already in another project, please let me know which one(s) so I can apologize...
#What does it mean that the FA articles have been "factored out"? Oh I think you just removed one from the table...
#Keeping the original template wording is fine. I didn't know the new wording conflicted with the project's goals. I just thought that listing details about what aspects of an ethnic group could be covered might tweak someone's interest ("Hmmm. I could write an article about the X people's Y"). But the the original wording is fine; no arguments here.
Thanks!--Ling.Nut 21:34, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Template wording: mostly, I thought that to speak of civilizations as being of particular ethnic groups can be very inappropriate. Is China only a civilization of the Han Chinese? Is Western European civilization of some particular ethnic groups? That could head some pretty ugly directions. Also, the project is not just about ethnic groups in the narrow sense, it is also about nationalities and other cultural identities. Many of the pages that we cover in this project would be offended to be called an "ethnic group". - Jmabel | Talk 06:04, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds right. I overlooked that... --Ling.Nut 13:01, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  various details of new system 

message: Pashtun people is up for Featured article review here. The review period has just started so there'll be plenty of time to address concerns. Anyone interested may leave suggestions on the review to ensure the page retains Featured article status. Marskell 11:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's great news! I don't know if I can contribute, but I am definitely rooting for you! --Ling.Nut 11:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pashtun people review 

message: When we set up the rating system, I was saying we should leave out "importance" because I thought this would only be ethnic groups as such. But now that I see the start of a list of articles, I see I was wrong. We have topics like Fort Mose Historic State Park and List of Scottish Americans. 
The importance categories used on Wikipedia are "Top", "High", "Mid", "Low". 
So maybe the approach is something like:
* Top: major, broad articles like ethnic group, nation
* High: actual ethnic groups
I'm not as sure what would go in "Mid" vs. "Low"; it is a matter of what would have broad interest... - Jmabel | Talk 07:49, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, since you want it, I'll set it up... I was afraid that people would be offended to see their paticular article described as "Low importance". --Ling.Nut 12:12, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was mentally debating whether further discussion is necessary.. but heck, I'll just set it up.. I think it's easy to "turn it off" if you decide you don't want it.--Ling.Nut 12:17, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Ooops now it's my third (technically fourth) post. Setting up the categories would take about 20 minutes or so; maybe a little more. Fiddling with  might take longer than that by itself. Ummmm. How big a priority is this? I'll look at it.--Ling.Nut 12:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Importance 

message: ... are not an ethnic group, only a language minority in Finland. This has been discussed on the F-S talk page, and the consensus was that F-S are the same ethnicity as Finnish people, at least nowadays. Read what the article says, in the "Identity" section! --Janke | Talk 07:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As explained on the project page, this project is not confined only to ethnic groups in the narrow sense. It is about "ethnic groups and other closely related topics" and it includes "sub-national groups" other than ethnicities in the narrow sense. It is very unlikely that someone will set up a separate project to handle the specific topic of peoples of a given ethnicity within a particular state. Many article here are about things that are not exactly ethnic groups: British Muslims, for example. At least one article here, Negro is about a word, not an ethnic group. - Jmabel | Talk 07:39, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Finland-Swedes]] 

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.  B2T2 20:27, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: Ethnic groups have to be ascertainable in objective terms.  The clearest one of these is endogamy.  It may not always be so easy to gauge since marriage stats don't always include ethnic identifiers, and not all groups have been examined for characteristic average genetic frequencies, but without endogamy, ethnicity is reduced to membership in a cultural club, and becomes almost entirely a matter of choice, i.e. subjective. Tmangray 18:01, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So what? Endogamy is (normally) a myth. Cultural identity is what matters. It's not just a matter of choice, as it's not just self-identification but also identification by others. Aditionally, the normal way of becoming part of any ethnic group is being born inside it. --Sugaar 21:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Objective Criteria 

message: Tamil people has been brought to FAR. Please be there and comment. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 15:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In my humble opinion, you should have gone through WP:GA before you went to WP:FA. There's no requirement to do so, of course, but the GA process can help you spot many things that would be questioned in FA.--Ling.Nut 15:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tamil people is a featured article. It has been brought to Wikipedia:Featured article review (FAR) as the article seems not to abide by certain criteria of WP:WIAFA. Please visit the article's  entry in FAR page for further information. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 16:01, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Confused?  GA has nothing to do with FA, and because it is an entirely subjective process, is not particularly useful even in bringing articles to FA status.  Tamil people is already an FA, and is at WP:FAR for review.  Regards, Sandy (Talk) 16:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Thank you for sharing. I was in fact a bit confused. I saw zero-point-zero inline cites. I was operating under the mistaken assumption that FA, whose standards you appropriately praise, would never accept that state of affairs. I am extremely certain that GA would have made some mention that rather glaring omission. However, I do apologize for suggesting that articles be taken to GA, or in fact for mentioning GA and FA in the same breath.  I hope I did not offend you by doing so. Thank you for straightening me out on this matter, as well.--Ling.Nut 16:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Tamil people]] in [[Wikipedia:Featured article review|FAR]]

message: The American Anthropological Association Statement on "Race" (May 17, 1998). 
:We believe that it [the statement] represents generally the contemporary thinking and scholarly positions of a majority of anthropologists.
Apparantly Wikipedia does not take into account the "the contemporary thinking and scholarly positions of a majority of anthropologists" on the issue of ethnicity.  -- Stbalbach 18:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Race is different from Ethnicity. Ethnicity can have absolutely nothing to do with genetics. It's much more cultural and historical. — ዮም (Yom) | contribs • Talk 00:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah. Stalbach, you should better wave that in truly conroversial entries such as White people and Black people, not here, where we are concerned about cultural differences rather than anything regarding race. --Sugaar 21:57, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project is POV 

message: I was referred here by Stbalbach about how to present the names of historic (i.e. groups of people who either no longer exist or no longer are recognized as identifiable) ethnic groups, for example the Visigoths or Vandals. At the moment, the article about the Germanic people who once ruled over parts of southern France & Spain is at Visigoth; the accepted name for the entire nation is "Visigoths", and I would like to move the article there. However, Stbalbach argues that whatever we call these historic peoples should conform to this Wikiproject's standard -- which, after reading the project page, I am not sure exists yet. Comments, anyone? -- llywrch 19:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No clear standard on this, and it would be too contentious to get a consensus. Either is OK. I'd lean toward Visigoths. Clearly, whichever way you go, the other should be a redirect. And please feel more than free to add  to those historic groups, and to add them to the grid on the project page. - Jmabel | Talk 03:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's pretty clear by common sense. All peoples are by definition plural, so either Visigoths or Visigoth(ic) people would be the logical names. Singular form should only be redirect (or in some cases maybe) disambiguation. (I've also commented in the Visigoth tak page in favor of the move). --Sugaar 21:52, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Historic ethnic groups

message: I requested a multiple renaming of several ethnic group articles. I hope that you don't mind that I created a subpage at this WikiProject; it looked like the most reasonable place. The survey is at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Renaming survey. Duja► 11:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple page moves 

message: I just added a bit of background to the confusing categorization issues regarding the Jingpo/Kachin (same page, different names) in China and Burma/Myanmar. Much of the confusion arises from the troublesome effort (IMHO) by the Burmese, British colonial and Chinese governments to create "ethnic group" or "nationality" categories that map to languages and territory. But never mind that, we have the categories, now how do we make pages that make sense.
Um... this is going to be a lot of fun to sort out. Lots of red links out there that refer to either a language or a sometimes recognized ethnic group, and nearly all should probably redirect here. Before embarking on that, though, we should try to clarify a structure. Key questions:
Using Maru as an example for all the (sub)groups
*Do we mark Maru language and Maru people as their own pages?
*Alternatively, do we decide to treat the dominant meaning of Maru as the language, make a page for it called Maru and describe it as "one of the languages used by the Kachin ethnic group".
*Do we accept some dialect classification scheme for the languages and redirect the dialects to the "main" language? Leach (1965) for example, calls Lashi, Atsi, Maingtha, and Hpon (plus "Normal Maru") dialects of Maru.
*Where do we redirect Atsi, Lisu etc.?
*Adding links to disambiguate Maru, Guari and maybe more.
This is too much work for me alone, so I'm asking for input and creating a space to discuss it; go to the Talk:Jingpo page to chime in.--Carwil 03:17, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I put some initial thoughts on the page that you indicated, Talk:Jingpo. --Ling.Nut 04:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kachin/Jingpo categorization: work to be done. 

message: Can I add Wikipedia:WikiProject Basque as "descendant". I'm not sure what's the requirements but it seems somehow logical that it is "parented" by this one. --Sugaar 05:50, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Basque 

message: Beginning cross-post.
:See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team#Stablepedia. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 02:56, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stablepedia