Welcome to roadip.com on July 6 2009.
This is an internet experiment running to monitor browsing habbits of individuals through wikipedia contents.

Talk:Multiculturalism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Sociology (Rated B-Class, High-importance)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sociology 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 Discrimination
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Discrimination, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Discrimination 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.






Contents

[edit] POV Check Nomination

It seems there needs to be a NPOV check on this article. A lot of back & forth mini edit wars, esp on India. Shirulashem (talk) 16:54, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Paul Cliteur & request to archive discussion

There's an article on Paul Cliteur in the Dutch wiki, mentioned in this article. Any volunteer to translate the lead (a stub is always a good start)?

I'd like to archive the old posts of this talk (and rearrange the archived discussions so that each archive gets, say, 250 Kb). Any objections?

Oh yes: I did a little cleanup (the page was a mess). I agree with those editors who have proposed to split this long-winged page in shorter articles.

Cesar Tort 16:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Done. For further archiving of this talk, Talk:Multiculturalism/Archive2 is now empty. —Cesar Tort 18:37, 7 November 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Australia's Riot

There seems to be an extremely non-NPOV statement for Australia with a footnote that indicates nothing of what was said. The news article cited as footnote merely states that two lifeguards were suspected of being attacked by Lebanese groups and the anti-Arab reprisal attacks were allegedly led by white supremacist groups. The sentences appear to indicate that Arabs are all evil and white people are all awesome. I think that qualifies as non-NPOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.227.137.1 (talk) 16:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I agree that bit needs work. As long as the citation is left, I think a more balanced portrayal based on the source would be a big improvement. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Multiculturalism in contemporary Eastern societies

I believe there is some confusuon as to the exact nature of the term "multiculturalism". Many of the entries under this heading are not relaed to specific multicultural policies: multiculturalism and multiethnicity are two different subjects. I would not say, as a whole, that multiculturalism is particularly prevalent in the region, if fact, tthe opposite is most likely true.

Indeed, the entries for Japan and South Korea should be deleted, or moved to "Opposition to multiculturalism" at the very least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.208.97 (talk) 08:23, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Lead Section completely useless

The lead section is useless. It says that "multiculturalism generally refers to a theory...that applies to...at the scale of...". But there's no actual definition of the theory!! I'd rather the section starts with "multiculturalism refers to the theory that ______ that applies to....". I will try to fix it for now, but I'd rather an editor review/check/update the definition I committed. I removed the sections on race/ethnicity because it seems self-evident that the term refers to cultural ideas, not racial or ethnic ones. I used the Cambridge dictionary definition of "multiculturalism" as "the existence of several cultures within a society". I understand the use of "divisions" might be taken as POV but.. I can't think of another term that says "preserving separate views between groups", which is what the Cambridge definition spells out. --76.20.62.213 (talk) 21:41, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Netherlands section POV

I tagged the section on the Netherlands for POV. Currently, it only discusses commentators who think that the multicultural model has failed (Fortuyn, Hirsi Ali, etc). This group is strong, but not uncontroversial. Some other positions should be mentioned as well. Princess Máxima for instance once stated that there is no such thing as Dutch identity (or Argentinian identity for that matter). She regards the whole discourse about the supremacy of Dutch identity as meaningless. Leaders of the Green Party and D66, and to a lesser extent PvdA (and maybe SP) have similar positions. These positions should be represented in the article as well. Wikipedia should try to represent moderate positions as well, even if they are more difficult to communicate. Jasy jatere (talk) 16:31, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] this whole article is a diatribe

The whole article has a decidedly anti-mc tone. Supporters of the idea of multiculturalism should also be mentioned. The discussion of individual countries is by and large a summary of right wing parties' positions of those countries. While these positions exist and should be discussed, they should be counterbalanced by some voices from other parts of the political spectrum.

I am not too sure whether the section on Islam needs to be that long. One can mention the problem that Islam poses for multicultural societies, but this should not get undue weight. There is really more to Multiculturalism than the position of Islam in Europe. Jasy jatere (talk) 17:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Personal tools

Visit joltnews for the latest headlines
Visit bloit.com for company information
Geed Media does computer consulting on long island.
This page viewed times. See Logs