Talk:Koenraad Elst

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 01:40, 2 February 2021 (Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Koenraad Elst/Archive 2) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Propagandistic style

This article appears as if written by some propagandists or his harsh critics. This is evident in the tone of language and content of this article. Onkuchia (talk) 14:18, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please make specific suggestions, or be bold and fix the issues yourself. There is a consistent lack of support for Elst among reliable sources, so the discussion of his work is going to be critical if it is written neutrally (no, that's not a contradiction). Vanamonde (talk) 16:47, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest not using Elst as a source. If there is anything interesting he has said, find reliable secondary sources instead (if they don't exist, then the material should not be in the article). I removed the recently added one but there are a couple of other uses of Elst writings in the article and someone with more knowledge about him should probably review those as well. --regentspark (comment) 17:52, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think we must edit the description. Its better if the description calls him an Indologist/philologist instead of an "activist", a term which he denies. It makes Wiki look biased. He has an MA in indology. And PhD in Asian Studies

I have edited the description, making it neutral.IndianHistoryEnthusiast (talk) 13:53, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Biased Description

The description is biased. I have changed it. Please let me know if there are any issues with the changes rather than reverting them back to the original.IndianHistoryEnthusiast (talk) 14:17, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To copy Vanamonde93, ..there is a consistent lack of support for Elst among reliable sources, so the discussion of his work is going to be critical if it is written neutrally (no, that's not a contradiction). Lead merely reflects the body. WBGconverse 14:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There's no need to notify you. You need to read WP:LEAD "The lead should identify the topic and summarize the body of the article with appropriate weight." You deleted material simply because you don't like it even though it should be there to comply with WP:LEAD. Doug Weller talk 14:26, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So an author of more than 20 books on Hinduism, Indian History and Politics is merely described as a "Hindutva Activist", what is the problem in adding "writer" in his description?IndianHistoryEnthusiast (talk) 14:31, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Author is a more accurate term; need to think about adding that .... WBGconverse 14:37, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the lead

The lead says "Koenraad Elst (born 7 August 1959) is a right wing Hindutva activist, known primarily for his support of the Out of India theory and publication of Hindu Nationalist literature."

I would propose to edit the lead to "Koenraad Elst (born 7 August 1959) is a Belgian Indologist and author of more than 20 books on Indian history, politics and Hinduism."

The current description is inaccurate. Elst has himself written about the defamation in this article.To the editors of Wikipedia, particularly the lemma on Dr. Koenraad Elst IndianHistoryEnthusiast (talk) 21:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article has already been adapted in response to that article. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 04:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would not be comfortable with a description as an "Indologist" without an authentic source. I very much doubt his interest is really "Indology". It is just Hindutva. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 06:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, Indologist may not be the right description, not without an authentic source. However, this description by Daniel PipesElst is much better than what is currently written in the lead. IndianHistoryEnthusiast (talk) 07:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Daniel Pipes is not a reliable source for this. Eg see footnote 44 here Or[1] and [2]. Doug Weller talk 15:41, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller I couldn't find citation for phrases 'right wing' and 'activist'. Could you guide me or add relevant references? I also agree with Winged_Blades_of_Godric and IndianHistoryEnthusiast that 'author' is more appropriate term.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Koenraad_Elst&type=revision&diff=959613987&oldid=959580602 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhawangupta (talkcontribs) 09:23, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dhawangupta: activist replaced with "author, right wing is sourced here:
Elst was an editor of the New Right Flemish nationalist journal Teksten, Kommentaren en Studies from 1992 to 1995, focusing on criticism of Islam and had associations with Vlaams Blok, a Flemish nationalist far-right political party.[1][2][3] See WP:LEAD, sources don't need to be in the lead. Doug Weller talk 13:25, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Doug Weller: Thanks for the update and your response. Dhawangupta (talk) 12:46, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Nanda 2009, pp. 112–113.
  2. ^ Vierling, Alfred (1 July 2013). "NIEUW RECHTS TEN ONDER, beschreven door Dr Koenraad Elst". Retrieved 19 April 2019.
  3. ^ Zutter, Jan de, 1962- (2000). Heidenen voor het blok : radicaal-rechts en het nieuwe heidendom. Antwerpen: Houtekiet. p. 17. ISBN 9052405824. OCLC 50809193.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)

Warning template suggested

Certainly, the article deserves some kind of warning template. I suggest "Unbalanced", but are there other opinions? Maybe "exaggeration of his alleged right-wing affiliations" is a more proper description, but I suppose that is also covered by the term unbalanced. If you disagree, please suggest an alternative – not having a template seems unwarranted. --Sasper (talk) 14:40, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No He is a strong right winger. What I say is that slander of him being a right wing by a strong leftist writer should be changed to proper qualitiative critcism of his works. No Adhominem. Mr IndianCotton (talk) 06:12, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Right wing author

LearnIndology, [3] This is supported by reliable sources in the article body. Why are you removing this from the lead? Please read WP:NOTCENSORED. And self revert yourself. --Walrus Ji (talk) 11:40, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article discusses that repetitiously, It is best to avoid heavy words like right winger and Hindutva author. We have done that on Romila Thapar and Wendy Doniger though enough sources are available addressing them as leftist and Marxist. So, it is best to discuss the nature of an author's work in the article rather than declaring them as some ist in the very first line. LearnIndology (talk) 12:11, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
LearnIndology, that is a flawed analogy. Only people associated with Hindutva refer to Romila Thapar and Wendy Doniger as leftist, not the mainstream. On the other hand Elst is called Right wing Hindutva by every Mainstream scholar and plenty have been listed as source. Wikipedia has to follow WP:MAINSTREAM and clarify the subject in the lead accordingly. Walrus Ji (talk) 12:18, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ad infinitum; see talkpage history. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:14, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Walrus Ji: Here are some quotes:

LearnIndology (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes not relevant to this article Moved to User Talk, according to WP:TALKOFFTOPIC --Walrus Ji (talk) 16:15, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[In response to those quotes] Could you please stick to the subject? We're discussing Koenraad Elst, a marginal indologist only known because of his support for Hindutva and fringe theories, not Romila Thapar, an accomplished scholar. This is not the place to rehash Hindutva talking points. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:02, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]