Talk:New anti-Semitism (term)

Good source [1]. --Deodar 04:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

Do we really need both New anti-Semitism (term) and New anti-Semitism? Why not merge? --John Nagle 18:12, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merger with "New anti-Semitism (term)"

The New anti-Semitism (term) article has some overlap with this article and anti-Semitism. The New anti-Semitism (term) article really isn't about the term, it's more of a historical article, and there's considerable overlap with anti-Semitism.

I'd suggest breaking up the article historically. Anything prior to the founding of Israel should go the main anti-Semitism article, if it's not already mentioned there. What's left is short, and partially duplicative of this article, so it can be merged in here. --John Nagle 18:44, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The other article was created as a POV fork and material was simply copied out of this one. It's best to discuss there what you think should happen to it. There's nothing in there that isn't here that needs to be; if there are differences, it's only because this one has been tightened in the meantime. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:08, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two things: (1) calling it a POV fork is unnecessarily antagonistic and inaccurate and (2) saying that material was simply copied out of here is to distort history. I tried to move (see [2]) the coverage of unrelated uses of the term into its own article to improve the focus in this article. The problem, at the time, was that there was a lot of material NAS article that wasn't directly related to the topic at hand. --Deodar 20:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The issue here is that the term "New anti-Semitism" has been used for all sorts of things over time, most of them unrelated to the term in its current use. While a historical survey of different uses of the term might be mildly interesting, it has little to do with the concept "New anti-Semitism" as it is currently used, and therefore the merger makes little sense. Jayjg ^(talk) 20:34, 3 Oct 2006 (UTC)

You and SlimVirgin disagree. And one of the two (Jayjg!) actually agrees with me. Whoa, strangeness. --Deodar 20:40, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I guess that means we're separate people, and not a unitary "team" after all. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never said you were the same person. But I do feel that in regards to the reverts on the template you are acting as a team to marginalize my valid edits. --Deodar 22:57, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ben, I'm sure that almost everyone feels that their edits are "valid", and that everyone who disagrees with them feels they are "invalid". And if two people happen to agree that a third person's edits are "invalid", that doesn't make them a "team", it just means they agree. Jayjg ^(talk) 23:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John, you're not even following the editing of this article. What you're suggesting has already been done. I moved the merge notice to the History section, but it's not even appropriate there, because what needs to be there is already there. So I'm removing it. If you want to discuss moving a few paragraphs into Anti-Semitism, by all means do, but better still just move them. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John, the article New anti-Semitism (term) reads to me as a list of the uses of the term over history fairly unrelated to the concept of NAS discussed in this article. It was, at one point, the history section of this article -- see this edit [3]. I felt that discussing what were essentially unrelated matters was making it difficult to focus on the actually thing this article should be about. That's why I split it off. If it can be merged out of existence that would be fine, and since you believe that some of it should go in anti-Semitism and not here appears to agree with my views on the matter -- much of that history isn't relevant to this article's focus. My attempts to do a clean split between the material in that article and this one were undone by MPerel reverted by Netscott, re-reverted by MPerel and then put back in by me and finally reverted by SlimVirgin (see [4]) -- that's why there is a lot of duplication between the two. --Deodar 20:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I agree that this is a pointless article, but everything appropriate to New anti-Semitism is already there, because this page was simply copied word for word from that one, so the appropriate thing to do is merge whatever is appropriate into the Anti-Semitism. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:41, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Better still into History of anti-Semitism. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article wasn't the main point of my actions -- I'm just not a deletionist. But the history section in the NAS article was trimmed down from is previous state by SlimVirgin in the interim (although she won't admit it) and those sections of this article that are no longer reflected in the more focused current version of NAS can and should be merged to the appropriate articles such as anti-Semitism. It seems that I can effect change on the NAS article, just not directly. Wikipedia is a strange place. --Deodar 21:50, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As everyone is agreed, I've added whatever's appropriate to History of ... The rest is already in New anti-Semitism. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]