Talk:White supremacy: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m Substing templates: {{Unsigned}}. See User:AnomieBOT/docs/TemplateSubster for info. |
→Nordicism: Problems with a lot of recent edits |
||
| Line 105: | Line 105: | ||
:Looking through that archive, I couldn't find any comment by Grayfell, nothing on Gobineau, and only unsubstantial comments on Nordicism. I support your suggestion to move it all to [[Nordicism]]. [[User:Rsk6400|Rsk6400]] ([[User talk:Rsk6400|talk]]) 06:15, 11 August 2022 (UTC) |
:Looking through that archive, I couldn't find any comment by Grayfell, nothing on Gobineau, and only unsubstantial comments on Nordicism. I support your suggestion to move it all to [[Nordicism]]. [[User:Rsk6400|Rsk6400]] ([[User talk:Rsk6400|talk]]) 06:15, 11 August 2022 (UTC) |
||
{{Ping|Altanner1991}} While I feel well able to go along with your edits until 04:27, 30 July 2022, I don't see much justification for your more recent ones. The most important problems I see are the removal of Rhodesia and South African apartheid together with your changes at the beginning of the lead section. According to [[WP:NOTDICTIONARY]], an article should start with a good definition. The idea of having an extra section called "definition" seems strange to me. Also, "White supremacy" has been used by a lot of normal people (not only scholars), including White supremacists themselves, especially during the bad old days of Jim Crow. White Australia also obviously is about Whitenesss, and - yes - White supremacy was justified by pseudo-science (I'll add the reference soon). --[[User:Rsk6400|Rsk6400]] ([[User talk:Rsk6400|talk]]) 18:18, 11 August 2022 (UTC) |
|||