| Revision as of 17:51, 6 August 2020 editMr IndianCotton (talk | contribs)36 edits →Meera Nanda: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 10:05, 16 November 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,258,610 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}}: 6 WikiProject templates. (Fix Category:Pages with redundant living parameter)Tag: Talk banner shell conversion |
| (36 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{oldafdfull| date = 7 April 2014 (UTC) | result = '''keep''' | page = Koenraad Elst }} |
|
{{oldafdfull| date = 7 April 2014 (UTC) | result = '''keep''' | page = Koenraad Elst }} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{ds/talk notice|topic=blp|style=long}} |
|
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|topic=blp|style=long}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=C|listas=Elst, Koenraad|1= |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Biography |
|
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-work-group=yes}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject India|importance=Low|politics=yes|politics-importance=mid}} |
|
|living=yes |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Hinduism|importance = Low}} |
|
|class=start |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Belgium |importance=Low}} |
|
|listas=Elst, Koenraad |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Literature |importance=Low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Politics |importance=Low}} |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{WikiProject India|class=B |
|
|
|listas=Elst, Koenraad |
|
|
|importance=low |
|
|
|politics=yes |
|
|
|politics-importance=mid |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Hinduism|importance = low|class = B}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Journalism}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Belgium}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{onlinesource |
|
{{onlinesource |
|
| year = 2013 |
|
| year = 2013 |
| Line 41: |
Line 32: |
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
==Right wing author== |
|
== Propagandistic style == |
|
|
|
{{u|LearnIndology}}, This is supported by reliable sources in the article body. Why are you removing this from the lead? Please read ]. And self revert yourself. --] (]) 11:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: The article discusses that repetitiously, It is best to avoid heavy words like ''right winger'' and ''Hindutva author''. We have done that on ] and ] though enough sources are available addressing them as ''leftist'' and ''Marxist''. So, it is best to discuss the nature of an author's work in the article rather than declaring them as some ''ist'' in the very first line. ] (]) 12:11, 1 February 2021 (UTC) |
|
This article appears as if written by some propagandists or his harsh critics. This is evident in the tone of language and content of this article. ] ] 14:18, 30 August 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
:Please make specific suggestions, or be ] and fix the issues yourself. There is a consistent lack of support for Elst among reliable sources, so the discussion of his work is going to be critical if it is written ] (no, that's not a contradiction). ] (]) 16:47, 30 August 2018 (UTC) |
|
::{{u|LearnIndology}}, that is a flawed analogy. Only people associated with Hindutva refer to Romila Thapar and Wendy Doniger as leftist, not the mainstream. On the other hand Elst is called Right wing Hindutva by every Mainstream scholar and plenty have been listed as source. Misplaced Pages has to follow ] and clarify the subject in the lead accordingly. ] (]) 12:18, 1 February 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Ad infinitum; see talkpage history. ] -] 15:14, 1 February 2021 (UTC) |
|
::I suggest not using Elst as a source. If there is anything interesting he has said, find reliable secondary sources instead (if they don't exist, then the material should not be in the article). I removed the recently added one but there are a couple of other uses of Elst writings in the article and someone with more knowledge about him should probably review those as well. --] <small>(])</small> 17:52, 31 August 2018 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:::Lol!!!! Mainstream scholar?? You mean the liberal leftist cabal who show zero tolerance for truth if it is not palatable to their ideology. Misplaced Pages has become woke and you have the cheek to ask for donation in order to promote your crap ] (]) 05:32, 7 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Well said. But you can no longer reason it out with this left wing woke Misplaced Pages ] (]) 05:33, 7 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
I think we must edit the description. Its better if the description calls him an Indologist/philologist instead of an "activist", a term which he denies. It makes Wiki look biased. He has an MA in indology. And PhD in Asian Studies |
|
|
|
{{od}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{yo|Walrus Ji}} Here are some quotes: |
|
I have edited the description, making it neutral.] (]) 13:53, 21 November 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Anti-Islamic literature. == |
|
|
|
|
|
The source does not say that "Elst is known for publication of anti-Islamic literature". Winged can you help me find such mention in the source? --] (]) 14:07, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:Check my last edit-summary. ]. ]] 14:20, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:The entire reception of his works in academia is centered around his corpus of anti-Islamic literature. Commentary by Blom Hansen (''radical '''anti-Muslim''' persuasion''), Meera Nanda (''peddle the '''worst kind of Islamophobia''' imaginable''), D. Anand ('''antagonistic to Muslims''';not precisely quoted), Subrahmanyam ('''''Islamophobia''' as the common ground''). ]] 14:26, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:: I agree with you and also aware that it does not need to be referenced right there, but I also do not find "known for publication of anti-Islamic literature" in any of the reference you present now either. "Known for" is a key element in that statement too.If you could share some of the reference I would also like to check in detail and may conceded or find a amicable middle ground. But right now, it does not seem plausible that on this BLP we can say in the lede that he is "known for" anti-Islamic literature (which one?). --] (]) 14:42, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I will wait for t/p watchers to chime in ..... ]] 14:48, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::: I see "far right hindu fundamentalist" more appropriate summary of some unfavorable critics and less harsher summary from other few`er critics. I do not clearly see a strong consensus among scholars for known-for-anti-islamic-literature. Like ], ] ,] and ] do not advance this image. If there is a room for discussion we should have it on a BLP for sure? --] (]) 15:02, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Why do you deem Gautier (grad-school drop-out; another fellow traveler of the Hindutva fold who has been himself deemed as Islamophobic!) or Beliën (who has his , much of which is not much mentioned at his article) or Rao (who has better qualifications than the other two but has no training in relevant academic fields and has an entirely negative reputation, on top of that) as ''scholars'', is a mystery to me. ]] 15:06, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::: They hold Phd and have published researched content. What about the other two you left out, what is your objection to them? --15:09, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::I am stumped by your speed. You edited your response while I was replying and my reply has lost little context because your earlier reply changed. Nothing new with you and me. Back to topic, there is still Pipes to discredit. And I don't completely buy your argument about totally duscounting Rao. --] (]) 15:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::Gautier holds a PhD? Please provide a source! Same for Belien. ]] 15:16, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::Also dropping in Micheal Witzel<ref>{{Cite journal|url=http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~witzel/EJVS-7-3.pdf|title=Autochthonous Aryans? : the evidence from old Indian and Iranian texts|last=Witzel|first=Michael|date=2001|journal=]|volume=7|issue=3|page=28|language=en}}</ref>:- {{tq|There now exists a closely knit, selfadulatory group, members of which often write conjointly and/or copy from each other. Quite boringly, they also churn out long identical passages, in book after book, sometimes paragraph by paragraph, all copied in cottage industry fashion from earlier books and papers; the whole scene has become one virtually indistinguishable hotchpotch.}} :3 ][[User talk:Winged Blades of Godric|<sup><span style="color:#00F">converse</span> |
|
|
|
|
|
</sup>]] 15:22, 11 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::::::I could not understand why you deleted long standing text with reference citing INTEGRITY, could you help me understand? --] (]) 00:38, 12 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::::Why don't you click on the link and find out? I removed the part, because the cited source did not support the assertion, thus failing ]. ]] 02:00, 12 October 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
{{reflist}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Biased Description == |
|
|
|
|
|
The description is biased. I have changed it. Please let me know if there are any issues with the changes rather than reverting them back to the original.] (]) 14:17, 21 November 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:To copy {{U|Vanamonde93}}, {{tq|..there is a consistent lack of support for Elst among reliable sources, so the discussion of his work is going to be critical if it is written neutrally (no, that's not a contradiction).}} Lead merely reflects the body. ]] 14:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:There's no need to notify you. You need to read ] "The lead should identify the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight." You deleted material simply because you don't like it even though it should be there to comply with WP:LEAD. ] ] 14:26, 21 November 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:: So an author of more than 20 books on Hinduism, Indian History and Politics is merely described as a "Hindutva Activist", what is the problem in adding "writer" in his description?] (]) 14:31, 21 November 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
:::Author is a more accurate term; need to think about adding that .... ]] 14:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Changing the lead == |
|
|
|
|
|
The lead says "Koenraad Elst (born 7 August 1959) is a right wing Hindutva activist, known primarily for his support of the Out of India theory and publication of Hindu Nationalist literature." |
|
|
|
|
|
I would propose to edit the lead to "Koenraad Elst (born 7 August 1959) is a Belgian Indologist and author of more than 20 books on Indian history, politics and Hinduism." |
|
|
|
|
|
The current description is inaccurate. Elst has himself written about the defamation in this article. ] (]) 21:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:The article has already been adapted in response to that article. ] -] 04:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 15:47, 1 February 2021 (UTC) |
|
:: I would not be comfortable with a description as an "Indologist" without an authentic source. I very much doubt his interest is really "Indology". It is just Hindutva. -- ] (]) 06:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:Quotes not relevant to this article Moved to User Talk, according to ] --] (]) 16:15, 1 February 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:: Could you please stick to the subject? We're discussing Koenraad Elst, a marginal indologist only known because of his support for Hindutva and fringe theories, not Romila Thapar, an accomplished scholar. This is not the place to rehash Hindutva talking points. ] -] 16:02, 1 February 2021 (UTC) |
|
|
:::This article begins with loaded words: "Hindutva ideology... Out of India theory.. universally.. pseudo-historical... mainstream scholarship... accuse.. Islamophobia.". |
|
|
:::That's before you know ANYTHING about him. The editors insist that this is fair and ], but, as with lots of articles that relate to India, it tells you that this is the colonial WASP viewpoint. Believe it at your own risk.] (]) 07:10, 27 May 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== "Who is a Hindu: Hindu revivalist views of Animism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and other offshoots of Hinduism" listed at ] == |
|
:::Agreed, Indologist may not be the right description, not without an authentic source. However, this description by Daniel Pipes is much better than what is currently written in the lead. ] (]) 07:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
] |
|
::::Daniel Pipes is not a reliable source for this. Eg see footnote 44 Or and . ] ] 15:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect ] and has thus listed it ]. This discussion will occur at ] until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. <!-- from Template:RFDNote --> ] (]) 17:22, 27 October 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== neutral policy on politics == |
|
@] I couldn't find citation for phrases 'right wing' and 'activist'. Could you guide me or add relevant references? |
|
|
I also agree with ] and ] that 'author' is more appropriate term. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The introduction was more of a negative statement, where as any political author would be first called, "american author" or "indian author" he was not even called a political thinker but a right wing individual and islamophobic. This is not a introduction but an allegation thus it needs to be corrected as per the policy of wikipedia, ] (]) 07:25, 5 January 2023 (UTC) |
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Koenraad_Elst&type=revision&diff=959613987&oldid=959580602 <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 09:23, 30 May 2020 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:@] We aren't neutral in that sense. We try to reflect reliable mainstream sources. Thus our articles on Creationism make it clear that its wrong, our articles on Nazis aren't neutral towards them. See ] ] ] 09:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC) |
|
:{{re|Dhawangupta}} activist replaced with "author, right wing is sourced here: |
|
|
|
::When the present mainstream is itself biased with leftist attitude with woke ideologies, then it could misrepresent the views of many Hindu authors and Hindu teachings itself. ] (]) 01:04, 15 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
:Elst was an editor of the ] Flemish nationalist journal '']'' from 1992 to 1995, focusing on ] and had associations with ], a ] ] political party.{{sfn|Nanda|2009|pp=112–113}}<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://alfredvierling.com/?p=3240|title=NIEUW RECHTS TEN ONDER, beschreven door Dr Koenraad Elst|last=Vierling|first=Alfred|date=1 July 2013|access-date=19 April 2019}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=Heidenen voor het blok : radicaal-rechts en het nieuwe heidendom|last=Zutter, Jan de, 1962-|date=2000|publisher=Houtekiet|isbn=9052405824|location=Antwerpen|pages=17|oclc=50809193}}</ref> See ], sources don't need to be in the lead. ] ] 13:25, 30 May 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
::{{re|Doug Weller}} Thanks for the update and your response. ] (]) 12:46, 1 June 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Introduction == |
|
{{ref talk}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lacks any proper source for 'harbouring Islamophobia'. Even the affiliation to RSS is not credible. ] (]) 11:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC) |
|
== Warning template suggested == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:There are more than sufficient references to this in alone - by writer and historian ], published by the New York University Press. What is lacking here? ] (]) 12:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC) |
|
Certainly, the article deserves some kind of warning template. I suggest "Unbalanced", but are there other opinions? Maybe "exaggeration of his alleged right-wing affiliations" is a more proper description, but I suppose that is also covered by the term unbalanced. If you disagree, please suggest an alternative – not having a template seems unwarranted. --] (]) 14:40, 7 July 2020 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::I do not know about the RSS what I do know is that if you're going to write about current day organizations and authors it's best to separate their core beliefs and foundational values and the actions of that group and it's members. For example, inform people about the BJP and it's policies based on it's Manifesto and after that terms such as Islamaphobia and Hinduvta can be used to refer to the actions of that group or some individuals within it, unless of course their doctrines by that very nature is Islamaphobic. ] (]) 01:06, 15 February 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Meera Nanda == |
|
== Bibliography == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most biographies of academics, authors, scholars, etc, on Misplaced Pages have a Bibliography section of the individual's work. It is very odd that a Bibliography section for Elst does not exist in his bio. It needs to be added given that he is a rather prolific author who has written many books. ] (]) 15:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC) |
|
So much of Meera Nanda? I wonder if her Wiki page has any polemics by Hindutva authors? If not why so much of her here? ] (]) 17:51, 6 August 2020 (UTC) |
|
The introduction was more of a negative statement, where as any political author would be first called, "american author" or "indian author" he was not even called a political thinker but a right wing individual and islamophobic. This is not a introduction but an allegation thus it needs to be corrected as per the policy of wikipedia, Ujjwaljha007 (talk) 07:25, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Most biographies of academics, authors, scholars, etc, on Misplaced Pages have a Bibliography section of the individual's work. It is very odd that a Bibliography section for Elst does not exist in his bio. It needs to be added given that he is a rather prolific author who has written many books. 38.65.249.252 (talk) 15:49, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Who is a Hindu: Hindu revivalist views of Animism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and other offshoots of Hinduism and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27#Who is a Hindu: Hindu revivalist views of Animism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and other offshoots of Hinduism until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:22, 27 October 2022 (UTC)