Talk:Zeitgeist

message: Shouldn't there be a link from this wiki to Zeitgeist (disambiguation) ?? Eulerianpath (talk) 18:06, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Disambiguation in the 'See Also' section? 

message: Should we really include a link to Generatation X for such a cool word?  Why just this generation?  If we really believe that "zeitgeist" refers to the spirit of the time, why would we just refer to a label that has been slapped onto one particular generation (which, in my opinion, is a lame label anyway). Tchoupitoulas 00:48, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled Header 

message: I really wonder what our Zeitgeist is right now...
: Eres un pen... dejo la palabra  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.225.8.11 (talk) 19:36, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zeitgeist 

message: My English is not so good, but i think this translation from the german Wikipedia is not correct. According to the german Wikipedia Christian Adolph Klotz wrote a text with the title "genius seculi", Herder read this and when he used this term he translated it as "Zeitgeist".---134.169.10.68 20:36, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, how come User:Guss (another native german speaker) missed it? :-) If you are certain, you are welcome to rephrase the sentence. Be bold. --BorgQueen 20:39, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: User:BorgQueen asked me to check the translation and the IP user is correct. I've amended the article accordingly. Valiantis 13:56, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Herder/Klotz

message: I'm not very fond of the use of "aggravate" here. Would "provoke" or "irritate" do better? What's the original French? Rhinoracer 12:36, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  De Stael 

message: I apologize, but I believe this article may bend too much to someone who has experience inside of a certain field or interest. Reading this from a layperson's perspective, after reading four paragraphs, I still have no idea what the word means. At least Wiktionary was a little more to the point. --Jmccorm 02:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: content/clarity

message: This article links to Volksgeist, which is a redirect right back to here. I'm not really sure what is the policy on this sort of thing, or where to look. It seems to me that it's only useful if somebody creates an article at Volksgeist, and I imagine then they'd stick up a link from here if there wasn't one. I'm going to remove the link for now, it's pretty useless as it is. Is that right? 60.231.120.154 21:31, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: volksgeist

message: The key word is literally. "Spirit of the times" is the translation, and "time ghost" is the literal translation. The idea is to show the relationship between the words.
: I'd tend to agree that the translation used should be "spirit of the times" rather than "mind of the times".  The former is both the usual translation of the phrase and comes closer to the German connotation of "Geist" (most literally "ghost"). Scott.wheeler 21:12, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Spirit of the time" is the usual translation. I reverted User:Seafunks edit from 7 June 207. --Zinnmann 08:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: ghost/spirit

message: I've given it two weeks semi-protection. If anyone objects let me know. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:19, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Protection

message: As a native Dutch speaker I don't think that Zeitgeist is a dutch word. Van Dale, one of the major dictionaries stated (when I searched for it)
U hebt gezocht op zeitgeist:
Het door u gezochte woord is niet gevonden in het eendelige Van Dale Hedendaags Nederlands. Dit kan komen doordat het er niet in staat, bijvoorbeeld omdat het te nieuw is, of omdat het niet voldoet aan de opnamecriteria. Maar ook is mogelijk dat de spelling niet correct is. Kijk ook eens bij de zoekinstructies.
translated;
You have searched on zeitgeist:
The word searched by you has not been found in the one part Van Dale Contemporary Dutch. This could be because it is not in it, for example because it is too new, or because it doesn't comply to the admission criteria. But it is also possible that the spelling is not correct. Also have a look at search instructions.
It might be in the dictionary, but it is very unlikely.
Though it is occassionaly used in the Netherlands, it is not uncommon to just use foreign words occasionally. The Dutch would just be tijdsgeest. You pronounce zeit as tsite and tijd as tite roughly, and they mean time. And as you can see geist and geest are quite similar. In Dutch it is has a less common use of ghost (as the lingering spirit of a dead person), which shows the relatedness of dutch to english. However, in dutch the primary meaning is something in between mind and spirit but it is not that spiritual in nature. It has a very rational mentality to it.
Tijdsgeest is interpreted similarly to zeitgeist. I think that when used in Dutch the specific group of people is often assumed implicitely. In Dutch I have often interpretted it as a global mentality too. That is also a big difference I think. In dutch it means mentality rather than spirit. You just don't use the meaning underlying the word spirit just like that. That would irritate the cultural mentality I think. Spiritual and non-concrete beliefs are generally (though obviously not by all, including myself) agitating slightly. Guidocalvano 145.116.231.220 15:54, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Zeitgeist is not a loanword in Dutch

message: The Royal Spanish Academy in its main published dictionary (DRAE) does not recognized zeitgeist as a spanish word.
If someone thinks I am wrong please let me know. Sorry about my English.
I can't edit the article so someone have to do this work for me.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.217.182.133 (talk • contribs) 22:37, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm spanish and I've never heard that word 81.44.61.90 (talk) 11:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Zeitgeist is not a loanword in Spanish

message: Zeitgeist it's also a movie: http://zeitgeistmovie.com/
i'm new and don't know how to create another page, for the movie. :)
thanks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.55.16.214 (talk) 17:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Our article is here: Zeitgeist, the Movie. El_C 20:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  movie 

message: I looked in the official Spanish dictionary at http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/SrvltConsulta?TIPO_BUS=3&LEMA=zeitgeist, and as you can see, the word "zeitgeist" does not appear.  The claim that zeitgeist is a loanword is Spanish should thus be reconsidered. I don't speak Dutch, but it seems to not be in the official Dutch dictionary either.Bjhecht (talk) 04:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Claim about Spanish and Dutch

message: Hello all! I have read the article and the talk page comments about this issue. I don't really see the problem with the article. Yes, there is a possibility of confusion with the various uses of Zeitgeist, but there is also a link to a disambiguation page that gives the alternative usages. It is not the responsibility of Wikipedia to insure against all possible misunderstandings by every reader, just most readers. I think that the article provides a very good explanation of the term and its meaning. If an editor disagrees and wishes to add a large section of text to the article it is the correct procedure here at Wikipedia for that editor to either hold a copy of the updates in their own user-space eg: in "User:Username/sandbox/new article" or on the articles talk page and to solicit comment from the community. If no comment is forthcoming, then the editor could try updating the article. If anyone complains at that point then that's their issue and they should not revert the change unless it has been first discusses (as the changing editor did) on the talk page. For an example, see the article I'm trying to improve here.
For what constitutes a reliable source (and the simple possession of a PhD does not constitute a reliable source, I have two) I have an example that I use sometimes, it is here if any wants to read it. Thanks fr33kman t - c 19:23, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Third opinion

message: The movement is a series of films to help people understand some of the things that are going on in the world right now.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.21.177.124 (talk) 06:12, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is totally misleading. 

message: Wouldn't the expression spirit of Vatican II count as a form of Zeitgeist ? Even if it does, some have argued that such an expression is inappropriate within the context of the Church, since the Church tends to live apart from the cosmopolitan modern State. ADM (talk) 06:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Spirit/Zeitgeist of Vatican II

message: In my opinion (as a native German speaker), the statement "included in common understanding of the term is the allegation that Zeitgeist may only be observed for past events" is untenable. I and many others that I know use the word also for present days "Zeitgeist". Since there is no citation proving trueness of the statement, I would recommend to delete it.
ThomasB82 (talk) 14:48, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zeitgeist in German restricted to past events only??? 

message: There is a move discussion that would significantly affect this page.  Please see Talk:Zeitgeist (disambiguation)#Requested move and comment there.  Powers T 03:01, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeitgeist AfD closed as Keep. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:15, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion notice 

message: Should it not go in this article that it was Matthew Arnold he introduced this word to the English language?ACEOREVIVED (talk) 15:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Matthew Arnold

message: Thanks in advance-07:36, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is a good source for a proper definition of Zeitgeist? 

message: 'Illusions of our errors not being readily apparent to us because the shared beliefs and assumptions of a particular era support them come from the Zeitgeist.'
This sentence is, I daresay, supposed to have a meaning. What is it ? The only one I can work out is this: 
The 'spirit of the time' (an expression that seems to owe a certain amount to an earlier (as it might be, Renaissance) Latin expression 'ingenium loci'= spirit of the place) conceals the illusion of our mistaken beliefs, which are based on beliefs and assumptions of a particular era.
But I could easily have misunderstood (Pamour (talk) 19:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  meaning 

message: Wikipedia Bigotry
On a more unfortunate note it has come to our attention that the English Wikipedia page of The Zeitgeist Movement has and continues to remain non-representative of TZM's work, controlled by anti-TZM editors which systematically remove basic data, while biasing the article in the most trivial and negative light possible.
 Wikipedia is known as an collaborative encyclopedia. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is hardly a scientific process in form as it is lends itself not only to a kind of 
 "mob rule", it also allows biased angling for content control by teams of editors that systematically override viable data. 
 In this light, Wikipedia has become a powerful tool of propaganda for controversial subjects, as it is one of the most searched web sites online.
 We invite all thoughtful, balanced editors to review TZM's Wikipedia page and help to place actual, tangible data about the Movement and overcome the negative/dismissive bias clearly evident in the article.
 Basic problems include:
 - Clear and present non-neutrality of the article's tone.
 - The notability of our global activist day "Zeitgeist Day" is currently ignored overall/being censored. 
 - The extremely bigoted, un-notable yet highlighted "Criticism Section", as put forward by fringe, right wing web sites are flagrantly listed. 
 - The complete removal of most all core projects/web sites central to TZM, including the refusal to allow The Zeitgeist Movement Defined book, which has been mentioned in 3rd party press reports many times, is apparent. 
 - The page is currently design to read like a "fan club" and not a true institution, with editors removing anything that hints at a dedicated, focused and global organization with an enormous following.
 GateKeepers:
 There are two core anti-TZM gatekeepers: "AndyTheGrump" & "Earl King Jr."
 Here is a recent quote by Earl King Junior who mostly dominates the page, expressing his bias and intent clearly on the Talk page. 
 "Zeitgeist really is a fringe group cult and that is why the usual media does not bring it up much, its just not taken seriously except by the zealots that believe in it. As you may know it has been called the worlds first large based internet cult...
 Earl King Jr. (talk) 08:27, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zeitgeist Movement 

message: This section is all based on one source, rewritten from a textbook. It is written as if each statement is a fact when it is mainly speculation/theoretical.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.67.117.27 (talk) 09:43, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poor quality psychological examples  

message: 'As every man possess a physiognomy by which you can provisionally judge him, so every age also possesses one that is no less characteristic. For the Zeitgeist of every age is like a sharp east wind that blows through everything. You can find traces of it in all that is done, thought and written, in music and painting, in the flourishing of this or that art: it leaves its mark on everything and everyone, so that, e.g., an age of phrases without meaning must also be one of the music without melody and form without aim or object. Thus the spirit of an age also bestows on it its outward physiognomy. The ground-bass to this is always played by architecture: its pattern is followed first of all by ornaments, vessels, furniture and utensils of all kinds, and finally even by clothes, together with the manner in which the hair and beard are cut.'
Beingsshepherd (talk) 02:02, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arthur Schopenhauer? 

message: Why is there no section containing criticism of the notion of 'zeitgeist'? There is plenty of it. Fustbariclation (talk) 22:21, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism 

message: A random sampling of some of the 16 citations led to the following results:
Citation number 14 and 10 are both links to dead web sites. Citation 9 links to an article in the MIT Technology Review that is about incrementalism in innovation. As such. But the article is cited as support for the idea that "innovation has been shaped by easy access to the internet." That link is also an aggregation of other sources, not an original source.-- Jmatthewross (talk) 22:32, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation Quality 

message: To say a concept or idea is Hegelian is in itself an example of Great Man Theory. So to say a Hegelian concept contrasts with Great Man Theory is hypocrisy. 47.215.13.169 (talk) 00:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Hegelian concept contrasts with Great Man Theory."