Talk:Asian

message: This article describes Pakistan as Middle Eastern.  Is it not a "South Asian" nation?
J3ff 03:48, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pakistan 

message: I propose leaving the article titled "Orient" ( to which the "Oriental" article redirects ) to debate the relative offensiveness or not of the term.  
Even if that is not agreed, then what is written in the Orient article and what is written in this article does not match up, so amendments somewhere are necessary.JRL 09:16, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oriental 

message: There are a lot of problems with the last section of this article. One is that it claims that the word Asian is "is not a very precise or accurate one". This claim is of course false. Another claim is that the word "can cause considerable confusion". This may be true - but does it cause considerably more confusion than, say, European or African? The sentence "some believe that […] the term should be replaced by [other terms]" automatically leads one to ponder who these "some" are; do these "some" perhaps advocate naming all Asian sub-groups in a long list as a practical and feasible alternative (only nine random Asian ethnicities are mentioned in the first sentence of that paragraph)? Or do these "some" just prefer Asiatic or the more achaic Oriental?
I suggest rewriting or else removing that entire section "Problems with the term". It is mostly opinionated ramblings about how the term is wrong and bad and indecent and racist and what not. Asian is in fact an adjective and a derived noun that both mean "of or relating to Asia (qv.)". See also Use of the word American. ///Big Adamsky 08:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Disambiguation

message: I think this article should direct to Asian people. This article is dealing with "Asian," and it's pretty vague title for a discussion about asian people like 98% percent. I think it should be redirected to Asian people and this text copied to Asian people. I mean "Asian" come on. The title should be self-explanatory and simple. If we are talking about "Asian people" it should direct to "Asian people" article. Let's make it concrete and they are pretty large ethnic and cultural identity too. 71.196.236.162 07:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  In fact, most of the articles' contents are identical.  If there are no objections, I can undertake to merge/move all to the Asian people article. Thanks Hmains 23:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree.  "Asian" should redirect to Asian people.----DarkTea 03:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: DT, you are mistaken: the above comments - more than a year old - supported a prior move of this article's contents to 'Asian people' (which was done); they do not support your willful and nonconsensual redirecting of this DAB as of late to 'Asian people'.  Further attempts to do so without clear consensus or added editorial input will be reverted. Corticopia 04:54, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Clearly, User:Hmains said "I agree" to the anonymous poster who wanted "Asian" to "be redirected to Asian people".  Both the anonymous and User:Hmains never said in their comment that they wanted "Asian" to be a DAB; they said they wanted it to redirect to "Asian people".----DarkTea 04:59, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unclearly: both of those editors indicated this LAST YEAR, before the article was moved.  Thus, your interpretation of their intentions is incomplete and is merely your willful redirecting unsupported by a consensus.   Feel free to involve others or compel for said changes.  Until then ...  Corticopia 05:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Asian to "Asian people"