Talk:Aryan (disambiguation)

Title Aryan

I'm moving this article to Aryan, because the english word should be used in this case, as this is the english wikipedia. Rayfield 14:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus; article already restored at the target of the move request. Dekimasuよ! 06:16, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aryan (disambiguation) → Aryan — possible malplaced disambiguation page. R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:37, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am proposing this move for discussion, rather than doing it boldly, because it is not clear to me whether there is a primary topic for the title "Aryan". To summarize the guidelines, if a primary topic exists, then that title should take readers to the article about that topic; but, if there is none, then the title should take readers directly to the disambiguation page. If anyone thinks there is a primary topic, they should identify it below and explain why; otherwise, the disambiguation page will end up being moved to Aryan. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Aryan page (which was primarily on etymology) was summarily overwritten (or moved to Arya) by a REDIRECT to this disambiguation page on 10 June 2009. I agree with the comments below that this disambiguation page is an inadequate format for readers to know where to go. I did like the rewritten page for Aryan of 8 June 2009. --Bejnar (talk) 17:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I actually got fed up with discussing this. Frankly I don't see what was fundamentally wrong with the article as it stood, nor do I see why it should be a redirect. As I said before when this was last raised, I think readers should have an article that lays out the meanings of the word and the history of its usage. Paul B (talk) 17:26, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Paul here. Personally, I really liked the drastic re-write into basically an etymological entry: I think that our readers could benefit greatly from such a general overview of the different meanings & mutations that this/these controvertial & often confusing word(s)/concept(s) has/have experienced through history. Consider it a glorified disambiguation page if you want. :-) Or consider moving the re-written entry to "Aryan (term)". – The main issue is that I don't think that our readers would get as clear a picture from reading through the different entries listed in the current disambiguation page, or from the Wiktionary entry. - Best, Ev (talk) 18:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Absent a persuasive case that there is a primary topic, this dab page should be at the ambiguous base name, Aryan. Where to put the article about the word(s) is a separate question. --Una Smith (talk) 03:35, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly oppose. There is a primary (if severely regrettable) meaning of Aryan in English, and we had a well-written article on it. May it become as obsolete as hauberk (on which we have an article); but it does not help to deny its former existence. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:11, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which meaning would that be? I see Pmanderson (Septentrionalis) links a version of an article, but the article version is about the word and mentions several meanings. --Una Smith (talk) 01:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Several variants of the same meaning, as might be expected for a term both controversial and academic. The distinction between the hypothetical Aryan language and the equally hypothetical Aryan people was not successfully made in the nineteenth century (which is one of the problems with the term), and we must include both in any adequate discussion of either; Aryan covers both. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 14:11, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

"Indigenous Aryans"

The naming of the article Indigenous Aryans is under discussion, see Talk:Indigenous Aryans -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 02:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there no Arya page?

It makes no sense to me for people named Arya to be included in the Aryan disambig page. They have nothing to do with it and it is a different word. lukini (talk | contribs) 18:18, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The page was most likely started as an adjective form of "Arya". Indeed, if "Arya" and "Aryan" were two separate pages, it would make sense for some of the entries to be included on both. However, since the page has grown considerably and there is a number of entries which would belong only on "Arya" or only on "Aryan", a split would make sense. All it takes is a volunteer willing to do leg work (wink-wink ;)).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); April 25, 2016; 16:32 (UTC)

Aryan Nations

Aryan Nations is white separatist organization. Why does User:Doug Weller in violation of the NPOV policy keep disruptively reversing my accurate edits? Wikipedia should be presenting truth in a non-biased manner, not engaging in political based defamation as [[User:Doug Weller wishes to do. 47.137.189.144 (talk) 00:27, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable sources describe it as "supremacist". Wikipedia goes by what wp:RS state. Jim1138 (talk) 01:16, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Christian Science Monitor is not a reliable source? 47.137.189.144 (talk) 05:52, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And to quote this IP (who earlier asked about making a Jew watchlist, "Wikipedia is a "safe space" so long as you are politically correct or a cultural Marxist, the latter which can be summed up in a one syllable and 3 letter word stating with "J". I see Acroterion has blocked the IP for 3 days. Doug Weller talk 12:51, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa. People actually say shit like that? We must be on the internet then. Drmies (talk) 16:06, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And I don't even want to repeat the rest of what the IP said on their talk page after their unblock requests were declined. Doug Weller talk 19:42, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]