Talk:Oriental (word): Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Russell Potter
imported>Russell Potter
Line 23: Line 23:
:[[Edward Said]] has many very well know critical statements on "Oriental" and "Occidental". ---[[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 00:11, 25 June 2007 (CDT)
:[[Edward Said]] has many very well know critical statements on "Oriental" and "Occidental". ---[[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 00:11, 25 June 2007 (CDT)


::This article seems to conflate the adjective "Oriental" with the substantive (noun) "an Oriental."  The latter is surely both offensive, and quite dated, in almost any context, and I don't think it's fair to lump the two uses together, as the former lends an air of false legitimacy to the latter.  I would propose breaking this into two entries, one for te broad term "Orient" in its historical contexts, Oriental Studies, etc., and the rest to become part of an entry on ethnic epithets generally. [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 08:29, 30 June 2007 (CDT)
::This article seems to conflate the adjective "Oriental" with the substantive (noun) "an Oriental."  The latter is surely both offensive, and quite dated, in almost any context, and I don't think it's fair to lump the two uses together, as the former lends an air of false legitimacy to the latter.  I would propose breaking this into two entries, one for the broad term "Orient" in its historical contexts, Oriental Studies, etc., and the rest to become part of an entry on ethnic epithets generally. [[User:Russell Potter|Russell Potter]] 08:29, 30 June 2007 (CDT)

Revision as of 07:44, 30 June 2007


Article Checklist for "Oriental (word)"
Workgroup category or categories Linguistics Workgroup, Geography Workgroup, Sociology Workgroup [Editors asked to check categories]
Article status Developing article: beyond a stub, but incomplete
Underlinked article? Yes
Basic cleanup done? Yes
Checklist last edited by --Aleksander Stos 04:38, 30 June 2007 (CDT) Larry Sanger 23:40, 24 June 2007 (CDT); John Stephenson 05:08, 22 June 2007 (CDT)

To learn how to fill out this checklist, please see CZ:The Article Checklist.





Reasons for this article?

As it stands, this article sourced from Wikipedia and modified by Will Nesbitt seems to be defending the use of the term 'Oriental'. Recommend some modifications. John Stephenson 05:11, 22 June 2007 (CDT)


I left this from an old Wikipedia article and culled it from some sources that I dug up. It sort of evolved into a defense of the term oriental because of a perceived (by me) assault on the term for political reasons on Wikipedia. I'm open for discussion and glad to help edit. Will Nesbitt 09:37, 23 June 2007 (CDT)

I don't think there's any problem of that here, so I'll have to agree with a notion John might have been getting at--there's no point/reason for it, unless you can justify otherwise.--Robert W King 09:56, 23 June 2007 (CDT)

Well, if it isn't edited more vigorously, we might delete it simply on grounds that it is sourced from WP without change (see Article Deletion Policy). But the topic itself is perfectly legitimate--just not a high priority, perhaps--and when did that ever stop us? --Larry Sanger 23:40, 24 June 2007 (CDT)

Edward Said has many very well know critical statements on "Oriental" and "Occidental". ---Stephen Ewen 00:11, 25 June 2007 (CDT)
This article seems to conflate the adjective "Oriental" with the substantive (noun) "an Oriental." The latter is surely both offensive, and quite dated, in almost any context, and I don't think it's fair to lump the two uses together, as the former lends an air of false legitimacy to the latter. I would propose breaking this into two entries, one for the broad term "Orient" in its historical contexts, Oriental Studies, etc., and the rest to become part of an entry on ethnic epithets generally. Russell Potter 08:29, 30 June 2007 (CDT)