Talk:Aromanticism: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→"ism"?: Reply |
Historyday01 (talk | contribs) →"ism"?: Reply |
||
Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
::Being aromantic isn't really any of those though, is it? It "just is" so to speak. [[User:Autisticml|Autisticml]] ([[User talk:Autisticml|talk]]) 16:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC) |
::Being aromantic isn't really any of those though, is it? It "just is" so to speak. [[User:Autisticml|Autisticml]] ([[User talk:Autisticml|talk]]) 16:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC) |
||
:::This is a bit of an old thread of conversation, but the suffix ''-ism'' is purely a nominalizer. True, it has uses for ideologies, but it is also used, as Wiktionary notes, "to form names of a tendency of behaviour, action, state, condition or opinion belonging to a class or group of persons [...]." This is the sense of it used in words such as ''aromanticism''. [[User:Arayaz|Arayaz]] ([[User talk:Arayaz|talk]]) 17:47, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
:::This is a bit of an old thread of conversation, but the suffix ''-ism'' is purely a nominalizer. True, it has uses for ideologies, but it is also used, as Wiktionary notes, "to form names of a tendency of behaviour, action, state, condition or opinion belonging to a class or group of persons [...]." This is the sense of it used in words such as ''aromanticism''. [[User:Arayaz|Arayaz]] ([[User talk:Arayaz|talk]]) 17:47, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
::::That's my thought too. And there are also more than enough sources to justify keeping this article at its present title [[User:Historyday01|Historyday01]] ([[User talk:Historyday01|talk]]) 21:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:03, 24 April 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Aromanticism article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
This article was nominated for deletion on 18 March 2018. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Wiki Loves Pride | ||||
|
An academic article which should be included
I stumbled upon it today (apparently it was published online on Feb. 14 of this year), but it could be useful. It's entitled "Exploring Aromanticism Through an Online Qualitative Investigation With the Aromantic Community: “Freeing, Alienating, and Utterly Fantastic”" Historyday01 (talk) 17:23, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
"ism"?
"Aromanticism" implies some sort of ideology which seems... Problematic. Autisticml (talk) 22:43, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- Not all -ism’s are ideological. Some are philosophical or scientific or social phenomena. While some Ismus are ideological, some of that is more recent than the root of -ism at large. Raladic (talk) 04:12, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
- Being aromantic isn't really any of those though, is it? It "just is" so to speak. Autisticml (talk) 16:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
- This is a bit of an old thread of conversation, but the suffix -ism is purely a nominalizer. True, it has uses for ideologies, but it is also used, as Wiktionary notes, "to form names of a tendency of behaviour, action, state, condition or opinion belonging to a class or group of persons [...]." This is the sense of it used in words such as aromanticism. Arayaz (talk) 17:47, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- That's my thought too. And there are also more than enough sources to justify keeping this article at its present title Historyday01 (talk) 21:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- This is a bit of an old thread of conversation, but the suffix -ism is purely a nominalizer. True, it has uses for ideologies, but it is also used, as Wiktionary notes, "to form names of a tendency of behaviour, action, state, condition or opinion belonging to a class or group of persons [...]." This is the sense of it used in words such as aromanticism. Arayaz (talk) 17:47, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Being aromantic isn't really any of those though, is it? It "just is" so to speak. Autisticml (talk) 16:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Categories:
- C-Class LGBT articles
- WikiProject LGBT studies articles
- C-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
- High-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
- WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
- C-Class sociology articles
- Unknown-importance sociology articles
- Articles created or improved during Wiki Loves Pride 2023