Talk:Jungle

The term jungle is very much used in popular parlance. The correct term is Rainforest, although Tropical forest can also be used. The Jungle Book by Rudyard Kipling perpetuates the use of the word. I have amended the article. Peter Shearan 09:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

No, the correct term is not rainforest—it's jungle. I've often wondered what insidious plan lurks behind the attempt to do away with the word jungle. Probably some sort of mulitcultural nonsense. You fail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.163.0.44 (talk) 22:15, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

One solution to the back and forth arguments is to just omit the origin of the word. That way everyone will be happy. You guys agree? Otherwise the changes will go on and on forever.

Accuracy and not everyone-will-be-happy must be the primary premise of Wikipedia writers. By the way, you must sign your name. Type four consecutive ~ marks. 4.131.34.64 21:36, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Origins of the word

I only just noticed this "secret war" of sorts. People seem to be switching the word's etymological origin from Sanskrit to Persian to Sanskrit left and right! What appalls me is that these users do not leave their reasoning on the Talk page and rarely even comment their changes in the page history. This is ridiculously un-Wikipedian behavior! So I took to effort to do the research for all of us. Merrian-Webster Online dictionary:

Main Entry: jun·gle Pronunciation: 'j&[ng]-g&l Function: noun Usage: often attributive Etymology: Hindi jangal & Urdu jangal forest, from Sanskrit jangala desert region 1 a : an impenetrable thicket or tangled mass of tropical vegetation b : a tract overgrown with thickets or masses of vegetation 2 : a hobo camp 3 a (1) : a confused or disordered mass of objects : JUMBLE (2) : something that baffles or frustrates by its tangled or complex character : MAZE <the jungle of housing laws -- Bernard Taper> b : a place of ruthless struggle for survival <the city is a jungle where no one is safe after dark -- Stuart Chase> 4 : electronic dance music that combines elements of techno, reggae, and hip-hop and is marked especially by an extremely fast beat

So indeed the word originated from Sanskrit. Anything otherwise would be original research which is unacceptable on Wikipedia. If, however, the research is backed by a peer-reviewed source, be sure to provide the link on the Talk page before posting. And for pete's sake, please SIGN your comments. 4.131.32.64 15:24, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

UTC, you are the guy who keeps posting Sanskrit. Stop acting like you are impartial. Untill further investigation NEITHER Persian nor Sunkist or Sanskrit may be used. -Johnny Dark

Sign your name properly genius! And no, I am not "UTC." UTC represents the time standard! 4.131.34.64 21:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Jungle in western culture

It reads like an essay. I don't see that there's much lost by removing it altogether. Junes 17:20, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree, but don't have the courage to remove it myself. -D

The whole thing seems biased, in my opinion anyway, so I'll remove it.

The problem with this section of the article is that it's unnecessary and doesn't make sense. Like it was mentioned above, it reads like an essay, not an encyclopedia article. It's not neutral. And, most importantly, it's not necessary. At all. You could have a perfectly good, better, actually, jungle article without it. I don't know who keeps putting it back, or why, but it needs to be removed.

The problem was that the word itself was POV, and I added the goddamn "essay" to clarify the goshdarn meaning of the goshdarn word. Then, the WikiLiberaceJugend manurecanned the contribution because it made too much sense. Heck with it. You're creating a monstrosity of white boy and neo-colonialist bias. See you to court.

POV Check

The statement: "Using this word to refer to a dense forest in a hot climate is nowadays considered colonialist, and such a forest must be called a rainforest even when the use of the latter term is scientifically inaccurate." does not seem neutral to me, saying it "must" be referred to as a rainforest even when the term is inaccurate? The rest of the article does not come across much better.

You got that right, and I'm about to clean up this article right now. Dragomiloff 01:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Picture

Somebody edited the picture. Please change it back.

I noticed and had already reverted it. No problem Sander123 15:52, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Roses?

"...a forest characterised by extensive biodiversity and densely tangled plants such as trees, vines, grasses, and also various roses..." roses? —Pengo 04:32, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

what types of roses are in the jungle?

where is the jungles locatied

                      -dls oboe rocks

weird

When I checked at school, this page was vandalised. I checked on my home computer, and wasn't. What happened? Pacguy19 21:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm interesting...I wonder what thats all about. ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(^Ταλκ) 17:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)==dont know==

What i think it is is that your school computer might be a little you know jinky!!!!!!!!!!!

P.S

The vandalised version of this page said something about Burger King.

Yeah, like Burger King imports a significant portion of their beef from former rainforest land that won't hold sugarcane anymore so they graze cattle until its desertified. Cutting down the rainforest majorly blows. Anywho, I took the liberty to insert that human activity is probably directly related to the impenetrability found at the edge of the jungle, Ill toy with a few different wordings, but I dont know if I can make it blend in well with the choppy flow of the prose. heh heh -Rudy Hasspacher

Wow

This article really needs alot more done. ΤΕΡΡΑΣΙΔΙΩΣ(^Ταλκ) 17:45, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

URGENT

Everyone who cares about the planet:

This article needs to state more about how evil villains are destroying the rainforests and how that we must become sustainable by acting like animals, not destroying them. Inthejunglethedeepdarkjungle (talk)

Clarifying Article and Justifications of Usage and Origins

There are some issues requiring attention. First, the word origins I believe should include Urdu and its closely related cousin Hindi. That is where the word as it is now used spread from. Its earlier origins as stated are Sanskirt. If everyone wants to go back to the original roots of words in common usage on the Indian subcontinent, it will all become sanskirt or persian and the arabic that came through the persian. The modern languages that spread the words, "jungle" for example, would not even be mentioned. This is not appropriate. Moreover, it is the definition in Urdu (and Hindi) that is now common usage, not the original sankirt which according to the previous version of the article included "desert" - clearly not what we call jungle today.

Second, the article as it stood was unclear in several places. It gave one meaning at first and then reverted to some "technical" meaning which was almost contradictory with the first. That is, the original meaning was a thick forest teaming with animals etc. and the later meaning was a bunch of low thorny shrubs outside the rain forest. I have taken a shot at fixing it, but it still may not be right. I have been careful to edit minimally.

Allegory Section

Is this section really needed? There were some quite obscure references to hobo's and such which I really didn't think belonged here, so I have removed the sentence. It is perahps ok to leave the "law of the jungle" in there becsuse it is commom usage and is related to the meaning of the juncle.

Citations etc

This article is now fairly complete. Ths subject is not one that requires much more - there are some references added and the rest does not really need references, but there is room for adding a couple if someone wants to do this. Most of the information in the article is generic. There is such a thing as over referencing - where every sentence is refenced.

I suggest we leave it alone and move on to other words, unless there are factual problems, in which case please correct and describe in the discussion.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.201.107 (talk) 14:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC) 

Merge

I propose a merge of the article to Forest as (as described in article) a jungle is basicaly a wet forest in a tropical zone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.66.49.224 (talk) 07:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - Did you even read the article? "The term may still be used in technical contexts to describe the rainforest biome, a forest characterised by extensive biodiversity and densely tangled undergrowth including the young trees, vines and lianas, and herbaceous plants." There is more than one definition here, chummer. -Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Tear him for his bad verses!)} 19:36, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

OpposeThis article is useful for distinguishing between common parlance and technical terms for various kinds of forests commonly called "jungle". Also the metaphor section is good information. I think some readers would benefit from some of this information, which would probably have to be deleted and not included in Forest in order to not be tangential to that article. Brambleshire (talk) 06:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

No Merge

My vote is not to merge. A "jungle" is more than just a forest. It has a connotation of an environment that is teeming with life in which the "forest" is the foundation on which the other living things play their roles. I would recommend leaving it as a separate article but provide links to "forest" and vice versa. Even on the Indian subcontinent where the word originates, there are "Forest Officers" not "Jungle Officers". There is a difference in the meaning and I believe it is the more encompassing environment that jungle connotes. If someone seconds this, I could add this aspect into the article.