Talk:Amish

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Amish was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
May 3, 2006 Good article nominee Listed
July 6, 2008 Good article reassessment Kept
December 14, 2008 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Ethnic groups (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Christianity / Anabaptist (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Anabaptist work group (marked as Top-importance).
 
WikiProject United States / Indiana / Ohio (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Indiana (marked as Mid-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Ohio (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Pennsylvania (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Wisconsin (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Wisconsin on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Religion (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

External links[edit]

The Amish Farmers Reinventing Organic Agriculture. "By studying the immune systems of plants, they've developed a technique that eliminates the need for chemicals." The Atlantic.

This external link is not too niche. It satisfies WP:EL.

Regards, IjonTichy (talk) 03:23, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

WP:EL states that links may "include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy." EL:YES states that it should be "relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article". I'm not sure how discussing organic agriculture is required for an EL and can't be briefly discussed in the article on the subject of agriculture. The idea that it's "too niche" is also not supported in EL in any way and should not be used as a reason to remove it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:26, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi Walter Görlitz. My concern about the content being "too niche" is in line with WP:EL. As I have just pointed out to IjonTichy over on a different talk page, part of point 13 in the 'Links normally to be avoided' section reads as follows:
Similarly, a website on a specific subject should usually not be linked from an article about a general subject.
In other words, the external links section should be reserved for content that is of the same scope as the wiki-article. In this case, I think the failure to meet the this criterion is clear. This is an encyclopedic article about the Amish. In contrast, the news article is about a particular Amish person who has taken to organic farming with help of another (ex?)Amish person who has started a business to spread his ideas. Worlds apart. In fact, I doubt the content of this news article has a place in this article anywhere. There is nothing to suggest that these farming approaches are adopted by the Amish in general and even if they did this is an incredibly trivial point in the context of the broader Amish culture and history. Any addition to the article along these lines would thus be undue weight.
But that is just by feeling. What do others think? CHeers Andrew (talk) 04:33, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Agreed with Andrew. Mikeatnip (talk) 17:36, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Now that I have more time, maybe I should explain my reasoning. I doubt that 90% (maybe even 99%) of the Amish even know about this particular happening. It is not representative of the Amish as a whole. The majority of the Amish are not even organic farmers/gardeners (I dont have statistics, just a guess from living among them here in Holmes County, OH). If every little accomplishment or happening that included an Amish person were to be linked, the links would be extremely numerous. Mikeatnip (talk) 00:22, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Mikeatnip. Does this resonate with you IjonTichy ? Cheers Andrew (talk) 11:07, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Legal edit[edit]

I just edited a brief description of Wisconsin v. Yoder for clarity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.255.199.149 (talk) 06:39, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

reference query[edit]

wth are "references" #77 & #78 supposed to be or mean? They are quite insufficient.

Hamm 2003, p. 101. Hamm 2003, pp. 103–5. 2001:558:6045:1D:7038:B44B:F00:BD14 (talk) 18:04, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

It refers to a citation that was removed some time in 2012-2013. By reviewing the page history, I have restored the citation to the article, as below. General Ization Talk 18:15, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Hamm, Thomas D. (2003). Amish Society (fourth ed.). Columbia University Press. ISBN 0-231-12362-0. 

Lemmata[edit]

Even though named "Amish" this article is about the Old Order Amish. The article Old Order Amish mainly consists of literature about health issues among the Old Order Amish. I'd like to suggest to move this article to "Old Order Amish" and to develop the article "Old Order Amish" into an article about medical research among Old Order Amish. Under the lemma "Amish" I would create an article consisting of the content of the first half of Amish (disambiguation) (That is the article without "Places" "People" and "Art, entertainment, and media"). In the moved article I would retain "For other uses, see Amish (disambiguation)" but delete "This article is about Old Order Amish, but also refers to other Amish sects." Any objections? -Tuncker (talk) 14:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

I am not clear with what you are proposing in a specific way. This sentence doesn't make sense to me, "I'd like to suggest to move this article to "Old Order Amish" and to develop the article "Old Order Amish" into an article about medical research among Old Order Amish." The Old Order Amish article (which I didn't even know existed up to now) looks like a mess, with a totally unbalanced weight on the medical aspects. On the other hand, I have noticed your edits on other articles and you are generally doing a good job of cleaning up the articles and making them better. If I understand your intent, you are wanting to clarify the distinctions between "Amish" in general, that includes New Order, Beachy, etc, and specifics that relate only to the Old Order. If that is your intent, I say go for it. On the other hand, a merger between Old Order Amish and Amish could work, since most people think of Old Order when they think of Amish. That would necessitate leaving the "This article is about Old Order Amish, but also refers to other Amish sects." If I understand your general intent, your proposal is probably the better option. Mikeatnip (talk) 15:08, 19 August 2015 (UTC)