Revision as of 01:44, 6 January 2023 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,292,510 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Koenraad Elst/Archive 2) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:22, 17 February 2023 edit undo2405:204:148d:59ef::1b2e:28b0 (talk) →Introduction: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile web editNext edit → | ||
Line 94: | Line 94: | ||
:@] 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) | :@] 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) | ||
== Introduction == | |||
Lacks any proper source for 'harbouring Islamophobia'. Even the affiliation to RSS is not credible. ] (]) 11:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:22, 17 February 2023
This article was nominated for deletion on 7 April 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Koenraad Elst article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization: |
Changing the lead
The lead says "Koenraad Elst (born 7 August 1959) is a scholar and author of Decolonizing the Hindu Mind. His work supports the revivalist theory of Hinduism and 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.To the editors of Misplaced Pages, particularly the lemma on Dr. Koenraad Elst IndianHistoryEnthusiast (talk) 21:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
- The article has already been adapted in response to that article. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:10, 17 March 2020 (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. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 06:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
- Agreed, Indologist may not be the right description, not without an authentic source. However, this description by Daniel PipesElst is much better than what is currently written in the lead. IndianHistoryEnthusiast (talk) 07:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
- Daniel Pipes is not a reliable source for this. Eg see footnote 44 here Or and . Doug Weller talk 15:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
- Agreed, Indologist may not be the right description, not without an authentic source. However, this description by Daniel PipesElst is much better than what is currently written in the lead. IndianHistoryEnthusiast (talk) 07:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
@Doug Weller I couldn't find citation for phrases 'right wing' and 'activist'. Could you guide me or add relevant references? I also agree with Winged_Blades_of_Godric and IndianHistoryEnthusiast that 'author' is more appropriate term.
https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Koenraad_Elst&type=revision&diff=959613987&oldid=959580602 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhawangupta (talk • contribs) 09:23, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Dhawangupta: activist replaced with "author, right wing is sourced here:
- Elst was an editor of the New Right Flemish nationalist journal Teksten, Kommentaren en Studies from 1992 to 1995, focusing on criticism of Islam and had associations with Vlaams Blok, a Flemish nationalist far-right political party. See WP:LEAD, sources don't need to be in the lead. Doug Weller talk 13:25, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
- @Doug Weller: Thanks for the update and your response. Dhawangupta (talk) 12:46, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
References
- Nanda 2009, pp. 112–113. sfn error: no target: CITEREFNanda2009 (help)
- Vierling, Alfred (1 July 2013). "NIEUW RECHTS TEN ONDER, beschreven door Dr Koenraad Elst". Retrieved 19 April 2019.
- Zutter, Jan de, 1962- (2000). Heidenen voor het blok : radicaal-rechts en het nieuwe heidendom. Antwerpen: Houtekiet. p. 17. ISBN 9052405824. OCLC 50809193.
{{cite book}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
Warning template suggested
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. --Sasper (talk) 14:40, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
No He is a strong right winger. What I say is that slander of him being a right wing by a strong leftist writer should be changed to proper qualitiative critcism of his works. No Adhominem. Mr IndianCotton (talk) 06:12, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
Right wing author
LearnIndology, This is supported by reliable sources in the article body. Why are you removing this from the lead? Please read WP:NOTCENSORED. And self revert yourself. --Walrus Ji (talk) 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 Romila Thapar and Wendy Doniger 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. LearnIndology (talk) 12:11, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- 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 WP:MAINSTREAM and clarify the subject in the lead accordingly. Walrus Ji (talk) 12:18, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- Ad infinitum; see talkpage history. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:14, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- 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 WP:MAINSTREAM and clarify the subject in the lead accordingly. Walrus Ji (talk) 12:18, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
@Walrus Ji: Here are some quotes:
LearnIndology (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- Quotes not relevant to this article Moved to User Talk, according to WP:TALKOFFTOPIC --Walrus Ji (talk) 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. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:02, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
"Who is a Hindu: Hindu revivalist views of Animism, Buddhism, Sikhism, and other offshoots of Hinduism" listed at Redirects for discussion
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)
neutral policy on politics
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)
- @Ujjwaljha007 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 Misplaced Pages:NPOV means neutral editing, not neutral content Doug Weller talk 09:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Introduction
Lacks any proper source for 'harbouring Islamophobia'. Even the affiliation to RSS is not credible. 2405:204:148D:59EF:0:0:1B2E:28B0 (talk) 11:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Categories:- Biography articles of living people
- All unassessed articles
- C-Class biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class India articles
- Low-importance India articles
- C-Class India articles of Low-importance
- C-Class Indian politics articles
- Mid-importance Indian politics articles
- C-Class Indian politics articles of Mid-importance
- WikiProject Indian politics articles
- WikiProject India articles
- C-Class Hinduism articles
- Low-importance Hinduism articles
- C-Class Journalism articles
- Low-importance Journalism articles
- WikiProject Journalism articles
- C-Class Belgium-related articles
- Low-importance Belgium-related articles
- All WikiProject Belgium pages
- Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press