|↓||Skip to table of contents||↓|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nordic race article.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This talk page is automatically archived by Misza I. Any threads with no replies in 60 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
GA reassessment December 2010
- This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Nordic race/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
The article fails criterias:
- 1a the article is written in choppy prose, no coherence between most of the sentence or between sections.
- 1b - the Lead is not an accurate summary of the article contents.
- 3a - it does not adequately describe the current scientific consensus about the nature of race. It does not describe the most relevant criticisms of the notions of Nordic race theory (generally considered pseudo-scientific racism). Several sections simply summarise specific Nordic theories without providing information about the criticisms levelled against it.
- 3b it goes into lots of undue detail in the sections about specific subdivisions and definitions of the Nordic race e.g. in the section about Coon (which is a completely discredited theory)
- 4. It is not neutral in that it does not adequately present the fact that the theory holds no scientific credibility in current scholarship, it leaves out many of the most vocal critics (the criticism section mentions only Arnold Toynbee and Benito Mussolini!), and it doesn't put the nordicism into its historical context of race based genocide.
It refers to Nazi Hans F. K. Günther as a "shining light of nordicism" (no attribution).·Maunus·ƛ· 18:40, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
You are right but in case you have not noticed this article is dominated by a very suspicious bunch. Look luck. Boo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 00:11, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
- No response. I am delisting.·Maunus·ƛ· 01:44, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
- Maunus, some of your comments are valid criticisms of the way this article have been messed up, but I must object to the last statement, which outright misrepresents the article. It says that the Nazis considered Gunther to be a shining light of Nordiciam, not that he was, as a point of fact. Paul B (talk) 17:33, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
- Rereading the statemnent about Günther I can see that you are right, although I still think the phrasing invites doubt about the actual sender of the message. "Such views were extreme, but more mainstream Nordic theory was institutionalized. Hans F. K. Günther, who joined the Nazi Party in 1932, was praised as a pioneer in racial thinking, a shining light of Nordic theory." (no source is given) - the point about no crticism other than mussolini and Toynbee also still stands.·Maunus·ƛ· 19:30, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
"The emergence of population genetics further undermined the categorisation of Europeans into clearly defined racial groups. A 2007 study using samples exclusively from Europe found an unusually high degree of European homogeneity: "there is low apparent diversity in Europe with the entire continent-wide samples only marginally more dispersed than single population samples elsewhere in the world."
This is just incorrect. Despite the low interpopulation differences, clustering within Europe can be clearly documented. You can start e.g. here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18758442 Centrum99 (talk) 20:21, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
- I second this, Northern European (Nordic) particularism can be clearly seen through the recent mapping of genome in Europe. This sould be refleced in the article. Heinkhel (talk) 19:04, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Comments about this article: "http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18758442"
With all my respect but I think that this article is clearly manipulated and it´s absolutely wrong. You only need to see that the map divisions correspond to real countries not to genetic studies, countries division can't be considered as an equivalent to genetic ethnicity. For example: a real person, me, I'm a red hair and my parents looks like what anyone could call Mediterranean race "by the way that is an invented race" and many people like me are red hair in the south of Europe, (I took a genetic test and it proves me that my biological parents are my parents, and the doctors said that this is only an example that in Europe we are very mixed from the north to the south, they included me in a genetic project proving that I'm related with Scandinavian people and other Celtics tribes, it was amazing considering that all of my family ancestors were from Spain). comment added by (David) 04:04, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Percentage of "Nordics" in Sweden and Germany
- Sweden - 10%
- Germany - 6-8%
"According to an examination of army recruits undertaken in the years 1897-98 to analyse the racial make-up of the Swedish people, only 10% of them were classified as examples of the [pure] Nordic type." - Dahlberg, Gunner. (1942). Race, Reason & Rubbish: a Primer of Race Biology. (1942). Columbia University Press. p. 202.
"When Guenther informs his followers that in a 'Nordic nation' such as Germany but 6 to 8 percent of the population display the morphological traits of the 'pure Nordic,' he condemns the 'movement' to the fate of an exclusive sect outside of which remain over 90 percent of the population." - Gregor, Anthony. J. (1961). "Nordicism Revisited". Phylon. 22(4). pp. 351-360.
This is why the late 19th century and early-mid 20th century race typologists had to introduce countless "mixed" sub-racial types with Nordic:
- Ireneusz Michalski: Northwestern (= Nordic + Mediterranean), Dinaric (= Nordic + Armenoid), Teutonic (Nordic + Cromagnonoid)
- Jan Czekanowski: Northwestern (= Nordic + Mediterranean), Dinaric (= Nordic + Armenoid), Subnordic (Nordic + Lapponoid) FossilMad (talk) 18:22, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
- The article makes it fairly clear that any single definition of "Nordic race" is a snapshot in time of the development from circa 1855 to today. There apparently has never been one consistent definition. It seems to vary between meaning generally the people who originate in Northern Europe to the concept of a "pure" Nordic or a Nordic "ideal", which I will leave to anyone's imagination. Does this study define its terms? Of course a lot of this kind of discussion was in reaction to the Nazis, of which Hans F. K. Günther was one. The more I think about this term the more I agree with others (perhaps including Paul B) that this is a pretty useless and antiquated term. I started out just thinking it meant "people from the north" but it has been misused over the years, not unlike the term "Negro". Dynasteria (talk) 02:22, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
- Nobody thinks races are "pure". It's a Marxist race denial strawman. It's more of a range on a continuum, in this case, although discontinuties are more significant between major races. Dismissing the term as "useless" because it's not "pure" is a false dichotomy. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 05:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
- I don't see what denying the existence of "pure" races has to do with Marxism (Marxism in fact says nothing about race. Indeed the existence of racial differences is perfectly compatable with it). However, Dynasteria rightly says that the term can simply mean 'people of Northern Europe', or it can mean a type, of which a pure or 'unmixed' model can be imagined/identified in the minds of the theorists who propose such. Paul B (talk) 10:13, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Heinrich Himmler and family.
Heinrich Himmler was one of the main champions of the Nordic Race as a Master Race in Germany, of which he considered himself a member, of course, along with his family. Why not show a picture of him and his family in the article?
This is a significant one: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/01/28/why_himmler_letters_deserve_closer_study_mallick.html
By the way, Nordic Race theory is closely linked to the Master Race theory and racial supremacy as it is stated in the article. For the Germans, the Master Race or Nordic Race were ubermenschen, or superpeople. On the other hand, there were the untermenschen, or subhumans. For whatever reason, the subhuman race has been much mentioned in relation to Jews, but the German Nazis included as subhumans the Slavic peoples, that they wanted to exterminate or to enslave: Poles, Checks, Russians, etc. It would be interesting to see or analyse how this theory has been dealt with in countries like the US in Nordicists-Supremacists circles, taking into account the mixed nature of the American whites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:3498:5EC0:B5A9:9124:9FFB:F011 (talk) 00:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)