Talk:Polyethnicity/Archive 1

Archive 1

Group Chat

Dana: Hey guys, just use this section to chat about small ideas and plans or research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danabodnar (talk • contribs) 17:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Hey. Go ahead and post your general idea, or what you plan to finalize as your information under any given category on this page. I began working on the Assimilation (or the arguments against it anyways...) so you can see what I mean. Feel free to edit it to make it sounds better / add your findings / whatever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nec26 (talk • contribs) 18:30, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Dana: I'll be focusing on the political ramifications of polyethnicity. I'll use Lijphart's book Patterns of Democracy for most specific examples such as Belgium. I also plan to research further into this to other cases that aren't necessarily in democracies. Within the coming week, I'll try to post all my notes and findings on here before we come together again and double check, expand, and write the article itself. I also have notes on other topics from my readings in The Rising Tide of Cultural Pluralism which can be used elsewhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danabodnar (talk • contribs) 18:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Alright. I put up a small excerpt under the assimilations topic. I feel like it's probably awkwardly worded, but I at least wanted to get something down. Look at it, read it. Reword it, if you like! I also went with a reference style... hope you all don't mind. I went to Dog and decided to follow their style, since it is a good article and a pretty basic one I figured the citing was a good one to model. So for books here is how we can site (it's pretty easy...)

<ref>{{cite book |last=Macdonald |first=David |coauthors=Claudio Sillero-Zubiri |title=The Biology and Conservation of Wild Canids |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford |date=2004 |pages=45–46 |isbn=0198515561}}</ref>

Just change the information as needed, if there are no coauthors, just delete that line. Pretty easy. The ISBN can be found on Google Books just type in the name and look for the first ISBN number and fill it in the lines. Pretty nice, huh?

Lastly, this is pretty helpful. It's a cheat sheet for basic Wikipedia commands!

Gabby: Hey everyone, I will be taking care of Conceptual History. I have: Characteristics of an ethnicity are

1. A collective name
2. A common myth of descent
3. A shared history
4. A distinctive shared culture
5. An association with a specific territory
6. A sense of solidarity

5 Ways an enthnic group and ethnicity are conceptualized:

1. An ethnic group and ethnicity are conceptualized as a relatively small one, sharing a common culture with and tracing its descent and kinship (constantly exposed to alien influences through migration).
2. An ethnic group and ethnicity are viewed as self-defined based on subjective factors, which are chosen by members from their past history or present existing conditions.
3. An ethnic group and ethnicity are viewed as an interest group competing for benefits from welfare states
4. An ethnic group and ethnicity are considered as an identity-seeking instrument by the peoples of multi-racial and multicultural societies.
5. An ethnic group and ethnicity are conceptualized as a device through which people seek a profound psychological unity, often based on common origin (sharing common blood). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ges21 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Gabby, what you posted is great! But it's more along the lines of the definition and conceptualization of ethnicity, and how an ethnicity is determined. All of what you posted is awesome, but unfortunately already outlined in Ethnic Group.

Conceptual history is the less tangible idea of when the concept (polyethnicity) was first developed within societies. That is to say, cultures began to recognize / become polyethnic during a specific time / era. That would be the conceptual history. You can look at the this for an example, actually.

Lastly, Piotr posted on my talk page and said that by November 2nd, he would like to see what we have actually posted on the Wikipedia article itself. I don't think this is a problem, and we're pretty much on pace. Once we get it up by November 2nd, then it's just extra edits we find (information wise) or suggestions others make as it undergoes the Good Article process.

Gabby: I found another book that goes more into the conceptual history because the rest of the last one didn't exactly help. The book is called Empire and Nation to 1750. Basically it talks about polyethnicity in normal societies and how it was exceptional in theory but rarely practiced right away. I'm just gonna type out all the stuff I have:

There are a few reasons why polyethnicity started (in 1750 as the book states). The first reason is that military success of some tribes helped push for polyethnicity because the tribes conquered others and incorporated them into their own. The newcomers started out as slaves and were considered very unequal, but gradually blended into the conquering community, which made a more heterozygous community. The next reason has to do with disease. Most places could not automatically replace their people and with such a shortage of people, they needed to import people from the countryside which became more and more distant. The new people kind of 'rubbed off' on the people who had lived in these disease-ridden areas, diluting the homogeneity. And lastly, trade played a very important role in developing polyethnicity. Traders set up protected areas where they could trade with others which led to the influence of other ethnicities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.49.30.98 (talk) 20:26, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Sweet that's awesome! Before European Hegemony states a few earlier examples as well. I think it would be great if in the article we listed your example, as well as one or two from the book to highlight the "rarely practiced" beliefs of Polyethnicity. Before European Hegemony can, specifically, be used to highlight how disease (as well as some trade) was the cause of a lot of the polyethnic development, and then later in 1750, conquering and trade probably take a higher chunk of the numbers.

<ref>{{cite book |last=McNeill |first=William H. |title=Polyethnicity and National Unity in World History |publisher=University of Toronto Press |location=Toronto |date=1986 |pages=85 |isbn=0802057306}}</ref>

Use that for your reference line

Clara: Okay so I have no idea if I am doing any of this right, please tell me if I am messing up our discussion page. I just added a Nationalism section under Politics and Polyethnicity because that's what one of my entire books is about, and I did my best to summarize what was relevant to our page. I also found a couple other things in this book that may be useful, I'm just not sure how exactly:

• Although multinational states resisted nationalism at first, it works when cultural pluralism is accepted. Nationalism was adopted due to the fact that cultural identity was being sought. For example, the Russian Empire carried out Russification and the British influenced many Scots, Welsh, and Irish through Anglicisation.
• It can also be argued however, that due to World War I, the polyethnic empires in Europe were broken, as well as those in Africa and Asia after World War II.

Did I do the reference line correctly? I think I followed Nick's instructions correctly, but I'm really not sure. I'm still working on my other book, should have something before we meet tomorrow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaraKHeck (talk • contribs) 22:46, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Nick: That's actually perfect Clara. Nice work! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nec26 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Nick: I've put up most of my information from Identity and Territorial Autonomy in Plural Societies. I still need to find a specific source saying Japan is homogeneous (or very low in polyethnicity anyways... I know it's fact I just need to find something to reference it within the article. --> If anyone knows, please tell!

We still have a lot of space in history to put up, specific examples from Before European Hegemony or The Age of Empire would work well to add just a few more ideas. That's one of those wonderful things that can just grow without us.. as long as we get it started. Anyways... I have a bit more to do tonight (I guess) on conceptual history.. I'm going to base point it off of Before European Hegemony because I can't find (or think of) earlier polyethnic occur ens / references before that time. I also still need a specific example where assimilation has occurred to a large degree in a culture/country. Does anyone have one?

Post your stuff up on the actual page soon! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nec26 (talk • contribs) 20:35, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: Hey guys, as we talked about at our last meeting where everyone was there the two books I got were not related to poly-ethnicity. In addition, we were told that we shouldn't each be doing our own section completely and we should be collaborating. I have looked into many articles online, and so I am going to go through and add things to other sections, as I did not get receive a section of my own to work on. Plus we learned all those cool new things about the library system today in intro to arts and sciences! I am putting them to work! Who did the main section on polyethnicity? because I found an additional definition... is my plan alright with everyone to go through and look for more references in online texts and articles? Jeh123 (talk) 23:03, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Dana: Justine, I like that idea. We need all the references that we can get. Also, Clara you said your book had a lot to do with politics. I'm putting together that article now but any information you have or things you can add feel free. Also since this is a collaborative work, we should all proofread and edit everyone else's work I think. Danabodnar (talk) 23:19, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Dana: By the way guys. So I can't quite figure out how to lay this out effectively since there it's hard to really explain the effect on politics without going into specifics so I looked at other articles to see how they did it. The article for ethnic group made a completely separate section for Ethnicity in Specific Countries. So I thought I should do that, but instead make this a subheading within the politics. Should I keep them together or make them two separate sections? Danabodnar (talk) 23:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Clara: The book I just read is a lot about politics but mostly in areas lacking polyethnicity. The section I added about nationalism is all that book was really good for, sorry I was so misleading. I'm working on a section about polyethnicity in Southeast Asia though so that's good! Also, this book is a selection of essays so I do I cite that? I have an editor and then the specific author for the essay I am working with. I'll be sure to read through everyone else's work and please do the same for me! —Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaraKHeck (talk • contribs) 23:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Clara: This is what I have on Southeast Asia, I guess it will be a section along with Spain, but I have no idea how to cite an essay that's in a book:

In Southeast Asia polyethnicity is certainly present due to the intertwining of people from both the great Chinese and Indian civilizations. Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam make up the mainland, and most of the people practice Thervada Buddhism. On the other hand Malaysia and Indonesia, mostly Muslim, and the Philippines, Singapore, and Brunei, mostly Christian, make up the insular part of Southeast Asia. This region has contributed quite a few aspects to the multiethnic state. Significant long-distance labor migration clearly took place during the late nineteenth century into the early twentieth which provided for different types of ethnic diversity. Indigenous ethnic relations arose from regional variations of cultural and linguistic groups, and immigrant minorities developed as well, especially the Chinese. Although there were significant political differences for minorities, they were still legitimate members of political communities, and even though this region is significantly polyethnic, there is a decent amount of unity throughout history, which strongly differs from both nearby East and South Asia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaraKHeck (talk • contribs) 00:08, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: Clara, I would say look up mla format or ask a librarian for help, because I think you would have to site the specific essay not just the article in general. Ok for whoever did the section on america under politics and polyethnicity, I found alot of good sources for polyethnicity in america so i think we should have a big heading thats like Polyethnicity throughout the world, or something and then subheadings for the nations or areas we go into detail about. I will add what I have right now under the politics section just because it goes with the other information there, but what I am adding I dont believe really falls under politics... what do you guys think? Jeh123 (talk) 01:51, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: and do we want a section on problems associated with polyethnicity or should I put something under the arguments against polyethnicity?Jeh123 (talk) 01:53, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: how do we feel about adding a section possibly somewhere on Polyethnicity and Marriage??? thoughts?? Jeh123 (talk) 02:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Dana: Maybe we could just make an entire new section on Polyethnicity and Social or cultural Relations or something like that. In that we could talk about marriage so we could keep the section of Polyethnicity in Specific governments under the Politics header and move what you added to the USA there. Well...this depends on if there are more social dynamics we can discuss besides marriage. I don't really think it's important, a section on just marriage. Danabodnar (talk) 02:51, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: what if we change the polyethnicity throughout history section to polyethnicity in nations cause that kinda encompasses history too, then do a section on the united states under that? cause then i can talk about marriages within the context of the US because you are right dana, marriage alone isnt enough to have its own section...Jeh123 (talk) 03:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Clara: I have no idea what to do about the social aspect, I haven't read much about it, so I guess you two would know best. As far as citing my next book, will MLA format help at all if it's not in the right format for Wikipedia? I need to know how to format the citation for the page, like the thing Nick showed us except for an essay within a book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaraKHeck (talk • contribs) 04:22, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: I just put it in there for now, we can always try to fit it in somewhere else when we go through and have all the sections and organization correct, and clara I say try looking at [1] and see what that does for you... try to fit it as best as you can, we can ask piotr, or another wikipedia editor?? Jeh123 (talk) 04:40, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: and group....what is going on with pictures? because there has to be some in there? and good ideas? does anyone have a picture that fits a section?Jeh123 (talk) 04:45, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: My book Identity and Territorial Autonomy in Plural Societies was also largely based on scholarly essays. Just use the reference code I posted before. Change the author of the essay, but keep the book, publisher, etc. the same. Pages obviously differ based on where you are taking your information from. Only cite the name of the essay if you reference a specific passage from the essay. You can take a look at what I posted from Dennis L. Thomson under Arguments Against Polyethnicity to see what I mean.

I think Polyethnicity and Society could be another heading. Let's go ahead and do it. Put marriage and anything else you deem fitting under there. I think the military aspect can also go under social. It ultimately feeds into society, so military could be a subheading... How about that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nec26 (talk • contribs) 04:47, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: sounds great nick! oh remember mr group leader, dont you have to post to his talk page to look at our page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeh123 (talk • contribs) 04:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Did I sense a hint of sarcasm? lol. Yeah, I'll post on his page... Uhh.

Who did conceptual history?

Nick: I'm going to got through now and rework some of the layout so the entire page is easier to follow. I've also removed the assimilation of polyethnicity (as I feel that between "polyethnicty and politics" and "polyethnicty and society" we will have assimilation covered. I also removed polyethnicty and ethnic identity, because that seems pretty well defined throughout the entirety of our article, and specifically in arguments against. If you have some research you want to add about ethnic identity, put it in where it fits best, or ask if you're not sure! We can always add the section back if necessary...

Justine: haha no i actually wasnt being sarcastic! i was just saying it! haha and ya when you went through it almost deleted all that i wrote because you changed the layout around what i was doing... kinda scary! so REMINDER EVERYONE save!! haha and sometimes if something happens it works to click the back button, luckily! and i kinda think politics and polyethnicity should switch to polyethnicity and politics since all the other ones are polyethnicity and.... unless we like that it mixes it up?Jeh123 (talk) 05:16, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Haha yeah, good point. I switched it! Anyways. Let me know if you think anymore big layout changes should be made/changed. We have full reign here to manipulate. Try to also work in your specific "section" instead of the entire page. That will help minimize (conflicting) edits at the same time! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nec26 (talk • contribs) 05:33, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Dana, did anything come of The Declaration of Human Rights? I've gone through and linked a lot of articles to articles within Wikipedia, as well as did my best to separate the references lines, so we can easily see them when editing pages... Nec26 (talk) 05:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: Nick what you did looks really good... but what is the point of the image of the plane?? was that you? cause I don't understand it! and I think I'm the one that's going to look at The declaration of human rights not dana Jeh123 (talk) 16:02, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Oh whoops. Yeah you! I put the plane up just to play around with images and see how it looks. I don't know what to put there! But I figure one would work there... Any ideas? Nec26 (talk) 16:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Awesome pic whoever that was! Good work! Sweet!! Nec26 (talk) 17:46, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Gabby: Hey guys, I have been reading some Before European Hegemony and looking through our notes and here is what I have:

In 2000 BCE, trade existed between Sumer and Indus Valley. In 100 CE, trade existed between the Roman Empire and Chinese Empire. Also, during 1550 CE, Europe started to connect with various parts of the World and it was the era of colonization. Polyethnic states were created through conquest which was present during trade (international trade resulted in contacts and migration).

In the seventh and eighth century, Islam unified many parts of the central region that lay between European and Chinese extremities. In the eleventh and twelfth century, many parts of the Old World began to become integrated into a system of exchange from which all benefitted. During the second half of the thirteenth century, many regions in the Old World came intro direct contact with each other. Between 1250 and 1350, the international trade economy was developing from Northwestern Europe to China. Over the course of the thirteenth century, there was remarkable cultural achievement, cultural maturity, economic integration, cultural efflorescence, technological and social innovations which produced surpluses, international trade, and a world economy with no single power. Lastly, during the fourteenth century, Europe and China contacted directly.

Disease also played a major role in polyethnicity because once a city was wiped out by disease, it could not re-grow without new immigrants. Slavery resulted in polyethnicity because they were imported from all over. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.212.32.86 (talk) 20:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Well, the trade in Indus Valley and Sumer and Roman Empire and Chinese Empire is definitely our conceptual history. If you can get me references on that I will write the section up... So I say we also mention Islam and the eleventh and twelfth century in history. When it was beginning again. Let's use the slavery, and disease portions in definitions (how polyethnicity occurs). And lastly the growing economy throughout the thirteenth century and China/Europe connection for throughout history. What do you think?

Do you have references for all that? It's really good stuff!Nec26 (talk) 21:20, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Dana: Hey guys, did you see Piotr's comments on our article thus far at the bottom of this discussion? I already went ahead and changed the headings as best as I could. Does he mean a picture like for polyethnicity in general at the top of our article? I'm thinking about it but having a lot of trouble coming up with a potential photograph so any thoughts? Also, we need a lot more for the 'lead' which is really simple after reading the prompt from Wikipedia that Piotr linked us to. Maybe if we just deleted the 'Defining polyethnicity' section and edited it to make it part of the lead. Or we could briefly outline our information and keep all the full sections.

Nick: I also went through and fixed a number of the formatting issues he mentioned (mainly citing locations) and I changed up the politics section a little. I was thinking Polyethnicty refers to the concept of multiple ethnicities that live in geographical regions (usually countries) or communities.

How about that?

Gabby I moved the 18th and 19th Century history to the proper section and reworded it a little. Whatcha think?Nec26 (talk) 22:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Okay, I did a lot! I'm gonna take a break for a little bit now... haha. I changed a lot of the history section, shaped up the conceptual history and added references when I could. Go ahead and read through it all, and if it seems like there is more we want to add / change / combine go ahead and do so. Whatever makes it seem more logical / look better is okay with me.

Gabby, I went ahead and added all your information in somewhere. In spots where we need a reference, I annotated the need for one. So if you could just go through and throw them in wherever, or let me know where each tidbit is from in the discussion here and I'll throw the references in. The only bit I didn't use was from the 15th century...

Also, during 1550 CE, Europe started to connect with various parts of the World and it was the era of colonization. Polyethnic states were created through conquest which was present during trade (international trade resulted in contacts and migration).

...I didn't really think it was enough to make another subheading for historical reference. But, it's up to you guys.

PLEASE let me know if something isn't make sense, or feel free to fix it. I tried my best, but I fear somewhere it won't make sense. Nec26 (talk) 23:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: Nick! you did amazing! I think maybe we should do what Dana suggested and make the definition section the lead and possibly add a bit just about the rest of the article. I think the lead is something that needs a lot of work right now, so I will read through leads and how to write them and I can get on that tomorrow if that's ok with everyone. I'll also look into the comment piotr made about some copyright picture thing?? I dont quite know what he meant but I'll read the article. also he said citations should be after the punctuation as well as one with EVERY sentence. also I think it might be a good idea to have multiple citations for different facts if we can find multiple, i think it makes the article more legit and then we'll be more likely to get good article status....what do you guys think?? Jeh123 (talk) 04:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Oh that's annoying. I read it as having to be before the punctuation and switched it all over. Rawr, FML. I'll switch it all back, I guess. I fail! Nec26 (talk) 05:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Woosh. I've done a lot. I went through and changed how we ref stuff (sorry guys, this is actually easier though!!) So every time you reference a fact (SHOULD BE EVERY SENTENCE), you just put

<ref>Author (year) p. pages</ref>

This will automatically appear under notes. Then under references (at the very bottom) put the previous code we were using for referencing books. Leave out the page numbers. If the book is already listed there (ALL BOOKS PREVIOUSLY REFERENCES ARE ALREADY THERE) you're done, if not, just add the old cite code! Easy right?

Sooo, I added a ton of references. But those of you guys that added paragraphs of information, please go back and reference every sentence. It won't take much time... just use the short ref code and you're good to go.

Let's get this done guys.Nec26 (talk) 01:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC

Justine: hey guys, i wrote on piotrs talk page to figure out how to make columns in the notes section because it is kinda long, I tried looking it up, but i could not figure it out because of the way the notes section is arranged!Jeh123 (talk) 03:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: The page is really shaping up, we just have to get those last references done, the lead (which I know Justine has), and maybe the growth throughout history.

Don't forget we have a meeting Wednesday @ 1:00pm in the Posvar Einsteins'. Please come, this will be our final wiki meeting! :D Nec26 (talk) 16:54, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: hey guys, i'm like dying, i am really sick and getting worse, i'm sorry, I can barely stay awake, so i moved the definition section to the lead for now, and i'll add more later and also do my ref's for my section and finish it. Jeh123 (talk) 04:56, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Justine: any one know how to figure out how long our article is? cause the length of the lead depends on how long the text is.Jeh123 (talk) 19:50, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Click the edit tab at the top of the page (not the one at the top of an individual section). If the article is 30 kb or longer, it will say that on top of the edit box. If the article is shorter than that, it won't say anything, in which case you should have a 1-2 paragraph lead. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 21:18, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick: Thanks for the help, Nikkimaria! I put up the article for GA Nomination today guys, so check back regularly and see what/if we can do anything to help expedite the process! Make changes the reviewer(s) suggest and we should be good. I hope... anyways! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nec26 (talk • contribs) 02:59, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Gabby: So, since this class is coming to an end, I read back over our article! Is there anything we want to take away or add before we are done for the semester? Being that my finals are pretty much over, I've got some free time to do any last research! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.212.38.136 (talk) 04:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Doin' Work

Gabby

We gathered books when we went to the library on Monday that deal with our topic. I am reading the book, Citizenship, Nationality, and Ethnicity by T.K. Oommen. Each of us were assigned books that we have to read by this coming Monday and we are to highlight material in the books that we find relevant to our topic. We will all then meet and discuss the information we are going to put into our wiki page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ges21 (talk • contribs) 01:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Nick

I will be reading The Ethnostate by Wilmot Roberson, as well as Identity and Territorial Autonomy in Plural Societies which is edited by William Safran and Ramón Máiz. I am going to note, annotate, and document any information I find particularly relating to Polyethnicity and the topics that we have devised for our Wiki article.

The Ethnostate

After reading The Ethnostate (or rather, reading and briefly skimming), I have decided that the book is a little too bias (leaning heavily toward separatist ideals) to use as an accurate source on Polyethnicity. Perhaps, though, we can use this book under The Assimilation category, under maybe an argument against assimilation. I'll take notes as such, and see if we can work it in. I'll explain in greater detail at the meeting on Monday @ Einstein's, and then post here about what we ultimately decide as useful information / points to make in the Wiki article.

Clara

I will be reading from both James G Kellas's The Politics of Nationalism and Ethnicity and Calvin Goldscheider's Population, Ethnicity, and Nation-Building, and I will share my notes with the rest of the group on Monday. Monday we will be able to determine where to go from there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaraKHeck (talk • contribs) 01:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Justine

I'll be reading, annotating and then sharing my notes with the group on monday, on two books. The two books are The Impact of Nationalism on the Muslim World which was edited by M. Ghayasuddin, and The Multinational Society edited by William F. Mackey and Albert Verdoodt. I will be trying to connect and see referenced to polyethnicity within the text and come ready to contribute to the wiki page. Jeh123 (talk) 03:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

The Multinational Society

After skimming The Multinational Society I do not know if it will be the best resource for our wikipedia page, it is peoples perspectives of problems, not actual scholarly material, I believe there might be too much bias. Although, I believe there are sources in it which could prove to be useful for our project such as theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nec26 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Dana

I am currently in the process of reading The Rising Tide of Cultural Pluralism a compilation of essays, edited by Crawford Young. I will study ethnic identity and polarization, racism, nationalism, and cultural pluralism, in several different nations. Danabodnar (talk) 05:36, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Empire and Nation to 1750 by McNeill

At the beginning of the course we touched on Polyethnicity in an essay by McNeill, particularly in the section titled Polyethnicity and National Unity in World History. I looked back over my notes and reread the essay and here is a compilation of information we could use and interesting subjects to expand on. Quebec: French and English together. Normal example of polyethnicity as opposed to unitary ethnicity. Marginality and pluralism are norms of civilized existence. All groups have absorbed other groups and cultures which makes a polyethnic structure. The idea of a monoethnic community came from Western Europe during the late Middle Ages. Took hold by the 18th century. The idea is still popular in ex-colonial Africa and Asia. There were also many nations and areas discussed such as Japan, China, the Mediterranean area, the Middle East, India, Germany, Italy, and the Low Countries. McNeill addresses their level of polyethnicity and what were the causes. We should discuss this at our next meeting.

Just as a later addition, in class Piotr defined polyethnicity as the "close proximity of people from different backgrounds." It coexists and is dependent on globalization which is regional economies, societies, and cultures becoming integrated on a global-spanning scale.

Causes of Ethnic Mixture and Pluralism

Large, densely populated areas such as cities which are breeding grounds for disease. The epidemics in cities led to the demand of a constant flow of people and food in from outside for sustainability. The underpopulation and famine led to the demand for a new work force which led to slavery, or in the case of Western Europe, serfdom. The slave population required reinforcement from afar and was always alien in a new setting.

During this era, homogeneity still prevailed in remote and/or barbarous lands.

Trade

The exchange of goods across cultural boundaries led to polyethnicity. Long distance merchants brought goods to one center and stayed temporarily or permanently which established foreign communities. This also caused the spread of religion.

Early draft review

Early draft review comments:

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid capitalizing words in section headings unless they are proper nouns or the first word of the heading.^[?]
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Each sentence should be referenced; currently there are unreferenced sections and paragraphs. Book references should cite page numbers. External links in references should be formated with more information than just a pure html link, see WP:CITE for more info.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Further comments: the article is developing nicely, but there are certain issues you need to address (in addition to the manual of style issues I noted above). The "Role through history" section is interesting, but as it is, you should make sure that all sections clearly indicate what was the polyethnicity role through history. Are you sure this is the correct way to frame that section? For example: "In the first century, trade existed between the Roman Empire and the Chinese Empire. This would ultimately lead to polyethnic pockets forming, albeit small and limited". That's a good point (if in need of referencing and a little more expansion), but is this the "role of polyethnicity"? Those sections to me look more like they are describing "how polyethnic societies formed throughout history". And that, of course, requires an introduction as to why early societies were not polyethnic. You also need some logic: the above section has a chronological overview, but then suddenly sections on Spain and Southeast Asia... "Impact on politics" section should explain why it is focusing only on some countries. Same for "Impact on society". Why are only those examples selected? If they are used by some scholars as the best examples out there, say so and attribute it to them. The "Criticisms" section needs some careful edits; you need to make it clear whether you are criticizing a definition of polyethinicity or polyethnicity itself (or some variants / aspects of it). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:07, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Using templates and <ref name= > makes it much easier

Hello all, impeccable work on the article so far, Kudos all round.

I would however give a few pointers on how to correctly CITE and how to use <ref name= > and the use of citation templates.

The most common ref you are going to use for this article is {{cite book}} reading through the template pages should give you a very good idea of how to use them. You don't have to fill out all the information on every cite. however the more information the merrier. title= is the only field that is compulsory for {{cite book}}.

So using Globalization in World History as an example you would fill it out like this: <ref>{{cite book |last1=Hopkins |first1= A.G.|authorlink1= A.G._Hopkins |last2= |first2= |editor1-first= |editor1-last= |editor1-link= |others= |title=Globilization in World History|trans_title= |url= |format= |accessdate= |edition= |series= |volume= |date= |year=2003|month= |origyear= |publisher=Norton|location=[[New York City]] |language= |isbn=0393979423|oclc= |doi= |id= |page= |pages= |trans_chapter= |chapter= |chapterurl= |quote= |ref= |bibcode= |laysummary= |laydate= |separator= |postscript= |lastauthoramp=}}</ref>

As you can see this has left rather a large amount of fields unfilled, that's okay, in fact we can get rid of them, leaving us with this: <ref>{{cite book |last1=Hopkins |first1= A.G.|authorlink1= A.G._Hopkins|title=Globilization in World History|year=2003|publisher=Norton|location=[[New York City]]|isbn=0393979423}}</ref>

Now, obviously, you are using the book multiple times through the article so rather than cutting an pasting each and every time I'm going to show you how to use <ref name= > so what we are going to do is give the reference a name, we'll call it "hopkins", but you can all it anything "Globalization", "global" or even "asghd" or "iu43gh", ANYTHING, but to make it easy to remember we'll just stick with "hopkins" (it is cAsE SenSItiVE) so make sure you stick with either upper- or lower-case. So you simply put in <ref name= > the first time that you use the ref instead of <ref> and then every time you want to use that ref you simply put in <ref name=hopkins/> So now every time that you want to reference Globalization in World History all you need to do is put in <ref name=hopkins/>.

Now you want to quote an individual page, but you don't want to have to cut and paste and modify the cite each time you ref a page, so (as odd as this may sound) ignore what I just told you. Well, not entirely. we'll still use <ref name= > so when we want to quote page three multiple times we'll call our new ref "hop3" and when we quote page 21 we'll call that "hop21", but again it can be anything so now we'll fill the article full of this; <ref name=hop3>Hopkins 2003, page 3</ref> and this; <ref name=hop21>Hopkins 2003, page 21</ref>, then whenever you want to ref page three you simply put in <ref name=hop3/> and to ref page 21 use <ref name=hop21/>

Then we need to split the references section at the bottom in two: ==Notes== and ==References== in ==Notes== we'll stick the {{reflist}} template, and since it is a particularly large amount of references will split it into 4 columns by writing it like this: {{reflist|4}} this will automatically list all the <ref>'s throughout the article and sort them into 4 even columns for us.

Under the ==References== We'll list each of the books like this: {{cite book |last1=Hopkins |first1= A.G.|authorlink1= A.G._Hopkins|title=Globilization in World History|year=2003|publisher=Norton|location=[[New York City]]|isbn=0393979423}}. That way when people see "Hopkins 2003, Page 3" listed under ==Notes== they'll know to look for it under ==References== for Hopkins name.

If you've done it all properly it should look like below.

References

Hopkins, A.G. (2003). Globilization in World History. New York City: Norton. ISBN 0393979423.

You may also want to check out the various other citation templates and use those in the article.Sanguis Sanies (talk) 17:19, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much! I just went through and redid everything to follow that format. It's a lot better. :) Thanks for the tutorial and advice.

And the compliment on the article!!

Nec26 (talk) 17:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Polyethnicity/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: @harej 04:59, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually, Peregrine Fisher has been doing a good job at #GA review. Disregard this. @harej

GA review

Hi. I'll reviewing your article for good article status. I'll make a few comments here on improvements needed, and after you respond, I'll make more comments. I haven't looked to closely yet, but I think you're pretty close to a GA. Good job. As you deal with each comment, you can add a little {{done}} template (looks like  Done) and sign it so we know what's left to be done.

The title in the "References" section need to be alphabetized. DoneNec26 (talk) 03:00, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't reuse the same refs in a row. Just put one at the end of what it applies to. For instance: "Polyethnicity relates to the ability of individuals to identify themselves with more than one ethnicity or identity.[1] This definition springs from the commonly understood definition of ethnicity being the shared ancestry of people.[1]" only needs the "[1]" ref once at the end since it covers both sentences. DoneDanabodnar (talk) 06:09, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Everything in the article needs to be covered by a ref. For instance: "The United States does not have an official language, but English is the de facto national language." should have a ref added, or the statement removed. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 22:01, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Regarding not using the same refs in a row, I'd say this applies to quotations (as it is obvious where a quotation begins and ends). But the example you cite is not a quotation. Currently the both sentences are referenced to the same source. But what if we remove the first ref, and somebody adds a new sentence in the middle? Without checking the article's history, the reader will not know if the first sentence is referenced to the first or the second source (providing that the second sentence is referenced at all). Thus I favor referencing every single sentence. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 22:17, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't really care, but it's frowned upon at FA, which kind of sets the standards. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 00:06, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, I am pretty sure nobody raised the issue during the review of my latest FAC few months ago (just look at the second part of the first para or most of the second para here). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:19, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, it depends on who's reviewing. Here's a conversation on it. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 01:31, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Which seems to boil to "no consensus..." :) In such a situation, I prefer to err on the side of caution - its easier to remove refs than to try to figure out which parts are referenced and which are not. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 02:05, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for the compliments already Peregrine, we'll work hard to make changes as you suggest them so that we can be wrap up the GA process quickly! My only questions is this; for a sentence like the one you stated "The United States does not have an official language, but English is the de facto national language." isn't exactly a reference-able statement. We can't reference that English isn't the official language, because it's not in law that it isn't. Which, by it's very definition makes it "de facto". So, we do we use a reference like the one here, where we state that most of the country (96% as it appears) speak English well, or very well; and then assume people can equate that fact to it being de facto as a fact? I don't want to remove it entirely, and it's kind of a hard sentence to reference! Nec26 (talk) 02:32, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

It has to come from a secondary source, like a book, magazine, newspaper. This would cover it, for instance. I just did this google book search to find it. If a source cannot be found, then it's best just to remove any associated statements. But, with google, you can find a source for most things pretty easily. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 02:48, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright, thanks! Referenced... I'll go ahead and try to find ones now and reference them. Thanks. Nec26 (talk) 02:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Very cool. I still haven't actually read the article, but another quick thing to think about is whether the whole article is summarized in the lead, per WP:LEAD. It seems like the first sentence that gave the definition has been removed. That may require adjustment, too. Also, merge any one sentence paragraphs into other paragraphs so that every paragraph is at least two sentences long, and preferably 3 or more sentences long. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 03:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright, I fixed the lead. Please let me know what you think. I also went through and referenced every sentence, though it's entirely possible I may have missed one... haha. I also was wondering if I could get clarification on this: if multiple sentences (albeit two or five) have the same source as a reference, do you or do you not want us to put the reference tag there? There are a few that have 2 sentences, and one in particular (Southeast Asia, I believe) that have a lot... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nec26 (talk • contribs) 04:28, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

(reset indent) Leave the multiple refs. We'll defer to your teacher on this one.

I would be nice if you could create an external link section, if there's some website that gives more information on this topic that would be good to include. If they don't exist, don't worry about it.

Let's look at some of the prose.

"Polyethnicity occurs in societies and it is usually specifically found in countries or other specific geographic regions.[1] Polyethnicity occurs" - This is choppy and repetitive. The repetitiveness is the use of the words "Polyethnicity" and "occurs" in two sentences that are next to each other. The choppinessis is that the sentence structure is not varied enough. Here's a tutorial on it. If you can, look through the article, and make sure that the same words aren't used too close to each other, and that some sentences begin with their subject, others don't, some are simple, and some have multiple parts seperated by commas. It's looking really good. Keep it up. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 04:39, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick are you editing the lead section right now? because I was trying to make changes when I went to say it it put that message up again. I changed the wording a different way than you did, although yours sounds lovely. What are you editing right now nick? to make sure that I will not change the wording of the same section. Just let me know when you are done if you want and then I can go through and read it and pick up other things. Jeh123 (talk) 05:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions, Peregrine Fisher. I just reworded the lead and made it less choppy. Is that better wording? I also went through the entire article and fixed the footnotes so that none were used in consecutive sentences. Are there still enough citations? Danabodnar (talk) 06:09, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Things are looking pretty good. I'm going to go sentence by sentence for a little bit to give you an idea of what to look for in the rest of the article. At this point, it looks like you guys need to work on copy editing it a bit.

"weakening of each societies strengths.[9] and also a belief that political-ethnic issues in countries with" - Punctuation or capitalization problem.

"Conceptually, all we can do" - "we" doesn't work in an encyclopedia.

"Conceptually, all we can do is record times when conditions for polyethnicity are met, although it is unknown if polyethnicity actually developed." - Needs a reference.

"The earliest recorded time of trade existed between Sumer and Indus Valley in the 3rd millennium BC.[11]" - Single sentence paragraph.

"Ancient Egypt was one of the first known civilizations to begin coalescing different regions and creating a vast area in which trade, conquest and immigration were all prevalent.[12]" - Same thing.

Just guessing, but it looks like about 1 in 2 sentences needs a minor tweak to get it up to speed. So, I recommend that you guys look through the article and try and find 0 to 3 problems within each paragraph, and make adjustments. If you do that, I should then be able to go through, find a few issues that are easy to fix, and you've got a GA. (I still haven't read the article, because I don't want to read it until all the little things are fixed, and then I can look at the actual content). - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 06:28, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright! I went ahead and removed that stuff in conceptual history. We can't necessarily prove polyethnicity there. It's ancient civilizations, but we could rewrite it to Egypt and the Mamluks (we have research on that) taking over the government and ultimately causing polyethnicity. This is before the first world system, butttt, there has to have been documented times before that. I just don't know how to go back to the beginning and be able to show documentation... blah. I'm gonna go ahead and read through the whole article too to make sure it's not errorfull. I'll post back soon. Nec26 (talk) 07:10, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I went through and edited a lot of stuff. I reworded a bunch of sentences. I'm sure there's still some problems. But I did what I could! I have to sleep now... Looking forward to getting this over with!Nec26 (talk) 08:27, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and tried to find online links that talked about this topic more, but I don't really see a lot. All I really see is the McNeil speech (one of our sources) and the Blackwell Encyclopedia Online (one of our sources). They are readings about Polyethnicity, but nonetheless sources. Do you think they would still fit into what the external links section should include? And I'll keep looking too...Nec26 (talk) 16:35, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

There are scholars who argue that the first world system existed in the times of the Sumer Empire and Indus Valley Civilization; discussions of polyethnicity may touch even on more ancient times. Regarding finding more sources, don't forget about Google Scholar and Google Books; see also my advice on getting extra help here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:30, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

More GA comments

"Polyethnicity divides nations, complicating the politics of polyethnic nations as local and national governments attempt to satisfy all ethnic groups," - I'm not sure we need "polyethnic nations", since that's what were already talking about.  Done Nec26 (talk) 07:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

"attempt to satisfy all ethnic groups, the majority as well as minority." - "the minority"?  Done Nec26 (talk) 07:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

"Many politicians in countries attempt" - Is "in countries" needed?  Done Nec26 (talk) 07:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

"Nationalism arguments also play a large part in the political debates around the world" - Sounds funny.  Done Nec26 (talk) 07:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

"The culturally plural state" - Maybe "Culturally plural states"  Done Nec26 (talk) 07:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

"It is also important to note that ethnic parties" - Probably don't need "It is also important to note that"  Done Nec26 (talk) 07:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

"Take the Flemish and Walloon nationalist parties in Belgium for example." - Too informal, and doesn't explain adequately.  Done Nec26 (talk) 07:41, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Looking good. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 01:31, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

"The United States is a nation founded on the basis of different ethnicities" - May not need "on the basis of"  Done Jeh123 (talk) 01:38, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"Ruben Navarrette (June 2007). "Language debate only divides us further". Oakland Tribune." - needs a "Retrieved" date  Done Nec26 (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"Many immigrants have come from Latin America and South America whom are native Spanish speakers" - Not sure "whom" is the right word.  Done Jeh123 (talk) 01:44, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"in the past centuries to become a significant minority and even majority in many areas of the Southwest particularly." - Awkward and "particularly" not needed.  Done Nec26 (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Let's put all references after punctuation. For instance, "Polyethnicity occurs when multiple ethnicities inhabit a given area, specifically through means of immigration, intermarriage,[2] trade, conquest,[3] and post-war land-divisions.[4]" should be "Polyethnicity occurs when multiple ethnicities inhabit a given area, specifically through means of immigration, intermarriage, trade, conquest, and post-war land-divisions.[2][3][4]" The "United States" section has a lot of refs in the wrong place, as well.  Done Nec26 (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"In Southern states like New Mexico, the Spanish speaking population exceeds 40%." - In NM? Or all South West states? Or what?  Done Nec26 (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"Disputes have emerged over language policy[18], since a sizable part of the population, and in many areas, the majority of the population, speak Spanish as a native language, the demand for legislation and every day things like road signs to be in both Spanish and English." - Unclear, and "things" isn't a good work for an encyclpedia.  Done Nec26 (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"It has evolved into an ethnic conflict between the pluralists who support bilingualism and linguistic access and the assimilationists who strongly oppose this and lead the official English movement." - What's up with the italics? Did you mean to use bluelinks?  Done Nec26 (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"Canada has suffered many issues between the French speakers and English speakers" - What issues?  Done Nec26 (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"The main separatist party, Parti Québécois, attempted to gain sovereignty twice and failed by a narrow 0.6% margin the second referendum." - What year was that?  Done Nec26 (talk) 01:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"Canada" and "Belgium" look good. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 23:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to try an continue the detailed review soon. But since you're doing such a good job, I'll add a couple things that are easy for me to spot.

Refs 19, 20, 21 need to be formatted.  Done Nec26 (talk) 03:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"New Mexico has a non-binding "English Plus" resolution, officially endorsing multilingualism." - Looks like an unrefed statement.  Done Nec26 (talk) 03:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Some of the refs are funky. I'll give some examples, then you should make sure that the rest are all right.

"Arabandi, Bhavani (2007). George Ritzer. ed. Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology: Polyethnicity. Blackwell Pub.. pp. Blackwell Reference Online.. ISBN 1405124334." - pp.?, Pub...?  Done Nec26 (talk) 03:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"Jean-François Cardin. "Parti Québécois". Retrieved 2009-11-19." - Needs publisher. All refs should have a publisher. If you have to do whatever.com, that's fine.  Done Nec26 (talk) 03:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

So every website should have a publisher, even if it is the main website that article is linked to? Nec26 (talk) 03:08, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I think so. It might be something like Main page, Google.com. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 03:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright, well I went ahead and did all that, then.Nec26 (talk) 03:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget the Retrieved dates.  Done Nec26 (talk) 03:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC) - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 02:35, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, the alphabetizing of the References isn't perfect yet. And, some refs that have the author don't have it included, like this one. You'll probably need to go through the References section and look at each one and make sure it's OK. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 03:20, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Aha. I knew something wasn't right when there was only one "L" title. I'll fix that real quick. Uhm. I did "the's" as "t"s and I don't know if that's the right way, so just let me know and I'll change it whichever way. But for now all the The's are alphabetized under T. Nec26 (talk) 03:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"the"'s should be alphabetized based on whatever word follows "the". Also, last names should be listed first, with a comma and then the first name. "Lee, J.; Bean" should be "Bean, Lee, J.". Not sure what the semicolon what doing. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 03:41, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll rearrange the the's. But the first source is a coauthor (coauthors are apparently done with semicolons) and neither of them have first names. So it looks weird... but yeah. His first name is "J." his last is "Lee" and the other guy is Bean. Nec26 (talk) 03:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I see. Do what you can so that the first letter of each line in alphabetized. I'm not that great with these things. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 03:53, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I need some clarification. I have everything alphabetized by title now (they should be perfect), but what do you mean by "he first letter of each line in alphabetized". Whatever it is, I'll do it! I just want to make sure I do it to your specifications, thanks! Nec26 (talk) 03:59, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

(reset indent) Well, right now it goes L, A, B, S, A for Lee, Angela, BO2001, Sharon, Arabandi. I'd like to see A, B, C, D, etc. I guess use whatever letter they're filed under in Notes section. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 04:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Alphabetized by author  Done Nec26 (talk) 05:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Looks a lot better.

""The Calgary Declaration: Premiers' Meeting". http://www.exec.gov.nl.ca/exec/. September 14, 1997. Retrieved 2009-11-22." Shouldn't have a bare URL. If that the publisher, just to exec.gov.nl.ca.  Done Nec26 (talk) 09:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"www.jrank.org" if that's the publisher, just do JRank.org or whatever. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 05:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)  Done Nec26 (talk) 09:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Found a new book source. Nec26 (talk) 09:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

JRank is a search engine, so I am pretty sure it cannot be a publisher. Publishers should not be weblinks; http://www.exec.gov.nl.ca/exec/ has a proper name (Executive... and so on). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 05:23, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"polyethnicity" is used 8 times in the lead. That's still a bit too much.  Done Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

"Due to the diverse population and peripheral zones" - What are "peripheral zones"?  Done Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

"it was nearly impossible to create a strong centralized state." - Makes it sound like they finally succeeded.  Done Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't necessarily like what I added, but it gets the point across. I feel like the "nearly impossible" implies that it may have eventually succeeded-- besides the fact that the rest of the paragraph explains it did. But, you do know more about GAs than I. Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

"Ethiopia has a great sense of nationalism because their ancient history and ties to ancient religious figures, such as Solomon." - "because of"?  Done Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Pointless sentence really. Removed entirely. Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

"Nationalism was only discussed within radical student groups prior to 1974 and by the late 20th century Ethiopia was forced to modernize their political system." - I don't understand how the first half and the second half of the sentence are connected.  Done Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm having trouble understanding the "Ethiopia" section. Try and get it so each sentence leads to the next one, and the paragraph tells a story that's easy to understand. After that, I'll look at it again.  Done Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Pretty much rewarded most of it. Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

"Because the nation was under the control of basically French rule, the Spanish eventually formed coalitions of ethnic groups to reclaim their own political representation, instead of the current French political system in power." - "basically" isn't a good word. Is "eventually" needed? The sentence isn't direct enough.  Done Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

"In Southeast Asia polyethnicity is certainly present due to the intertwining of people from both the Chinese and Indian civilizations." - "certainly" probably not needed. "present due to the intertwining of people" is awkward.  Done Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

"This region has contributed quite a few aspects to the" - "quite a few aspects" not needed  Done Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

The "Southeast Asia" section is confusing like the "Ethiopia" section. Make it easier to understand.  Done Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I only changed a little. It's comma heavy (because of the lists of countries) but I think it seems pretty straightforward now). Nec26 (talk) 02:21, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, more than half way through the article. Keep it up. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 19:17, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Even more GA comments

"Polyethnicity, over time, can change the way societies practices certain cultural norms" - "practice"?, is "certain" needed?  Done Danabodnar (talk) 21:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"Polyethnicity rose from the belief that people can identify themselves with more than one ethnicity." - That's only one of the meanings of polyethnicity, correct? If so make that clear.  Done Nec26 (talk) 21:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Since we've already stated that intermarriage causes polyethnicity, I guess we don't even have to mention it here. Since we're talking about intermarriage.

"increase in intermarriages and in the United States this has led to a blur in ethnic lines" - "blurring of"?  Done Nec26 (talk) 21:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"In 2000, Multiracial Americans numbered 6.8 million or 2.4% of the population" - Is that the real number, or just how many self identified?  Done Nec26 (talk) 21:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"because blacks hace a "legacy of slaver," a history of discrimination" - "slaver"?  Done Danabodnar (talk) 21:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"They are considered to be polyethnic due to the difference in race, ethnicity, language or background." - "differences"?  Done Danabodnar (talk) 21:10, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"While there are many examples of polyethnic forces, the most prominent are among the largest armed forces in the world, including the United States, the former USSR, and China." - Makes it sound like the United States is an armed force.  Done Danabodnar (talk) 21:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"phenomena" - Is the plural what we want here?  Done Danabodnar (talk) 21:16, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

The "Military" paragraph feels like it needs another sentence or two. Didn't the military lead integration in the US, and maybe other countries?  Done Nec26 (talk) 08:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

"Scholars, such as Wilmot Robertson in the Ethnostate" - Should there be a "the" before "Ethnostate"?  Done Nec26 (talk) 21:14, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

"He states his opposition saying that sum of all the parts (within a polyethnic culture) are not greater than each of the parts' own abilities" - "abilities" seems a odd word. What exactly was greater?  Done Nec26 (talk) 08:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

"Thomson points out the benefits in some level (albeit small) in separatist policies." - Should it be "of separatist"?  Done Nec26 (talk) 08:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

"He argues the benefits of allowing such ethnic groups, like the Amish and the Hutterites in the United States and Canada, or the Sami in Norway, to live on the edges of cultures or governance.[10] These are such ethnic groups that would prefer to retain their ethnic identity, and thus prefer separatist policies for themselves." - Not a fan of the word "such", also this part is not clear.  Done Nec26 (talk) 08:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I tried to clear it up as best as I could. Let me know. Nec26 (talk) 08:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

And, the map of Asia shows too much, I think. What about File:Location Southeast Asia.svg  Done Danabodnar (talk) 22:39, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Moved to left side Nec26 (talk) 08:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, that's the end. If you can fix all the stuff I mentioned above, I'll give it another read through, and we'll be very close to done. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 19:40, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget the comments at the end of the section above. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 23:12, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Missed those, lol. I'll do 'em now. Thanks Nec26 (talk) 01:56, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Voilà. All done!! Nec26 (talk) 02:23, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

"Ethiopia is a polyethnic nation consisting of about 80 different ethnic groups and 84 indigenous languages." - Is it "about"? It seems pretty specific.  Done Nec26 (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

"Due to the diverse population and rural zones" - Should "zones" be "areas"?  Done Nec26 (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

"though it was eventually accomplished through political evolution." - "accomplished" or "occurred"?

I think accomplished is the optimal word here. Because we are talking about the difficulty of it actually working, it makes it goal oriented (I feel anyways) and, thus, accomplished seems far more fitting. Occurred makes it sound like it just magically happened one day.

"A military regime named the Dergue" - "the Dergue military regime"?  Done Nec26 (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

"took control with a Marxist-Leninist ideology" - "with a" sounds funny.

What would you prefer here? I honestly feel as if "with a" doesn't sound funny at all... so I'm not really sure what to change it to / what the necessity of the change is.

"rejecting compromise for any nationality issues." - Should "for" be "over"?  Done Nec26 (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

"Ethiopia suffered a series of famines and after the USSR collapsed, they lost their aid from the Soviet Union and the Dergue regime collapsed." - Two "collapsed"s too close together.  Done Nec26 (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

"Eventually Ethiopia restabilized and adopted a modern political system of federal parliamentary republic." - Sounds funny.  Done Nec26 (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

"It was still impossible to create a central government holding all power, so the government was torn." - Awkward.

Which part of the this sentence is awkward?

"There is now a central federal government presiding over ethnically-based regional states" - "The central federal government noew presides over ethnically-based regional states"  Done Nec26 (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

OK, so that's how many issues were left in the "Ethiopia" section. It looks like the "Southeast Asia" section has about the same number of problems, so go through it sentence by sentence and make sure each is worded as well as it can be. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 17:45, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I've mulled over it sooo many times already. So much that it all just sounds right to me. I took out the excessive commas in the lists and just went with parenthesis but, like I said, I just can't work with that section anymore. Can anyone else do it? Nec26 (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Nick, I read it and edited some things, but it still does not sound perfect. let me know what you think! Jeh123 (talk) 03:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Pretty close.

"In Southeast Asia polyethnicity is present due to the interaction between people of Chinese and Indian descent.[citation needed] The continental area (Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam) generally practices Theravada Buddhism.[42]" - Find a source for the citation needed, or why not just make it "In Southeast Asia the continental area (Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam) generally practices Theravada Buddhism.[42]"  Done

Guys, I think we should just delete that sentence. I don't have these sources, and the polyethnicity is clearly explained enough without that sentence which the rest of the paragraph doesn't really elaborate on. Danabodnar (talk) 22:12, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

I changed it around. The ideas are related, so let me know what you think. Nec26 (talk) 00:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

"Indigenous ethnic relations arose from regional variations of cultural and linguistic groups, while immigrant minorities developed as quickly (especially the Chinese)." - I don't know what this sentence means. Make it clearer.  DoneNec26 (talk) 00:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

"An increase in intermarriages in the United States this has led to the blurring of ethnic lines." -"this" not needed.  Done Danabodnar (talk) 22:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

"This is the case, the authors argue, because blacks hace" - Who is the author? "hace"?  Done Nec26 (talk) 00:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I fixed 'have,' but I don't know who 'the authors' are. It seems that it was just added in there, but this is a direct quote so we can't elaborate on who those authors are. Justine this is you! Danabodnar (talk) 22:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

The authors and Lee and Bean. We already have them referenced for what Arabandi is referencing in his article. I went ahead and put in brackets (how you would usually edit a direct quote) but I don't know if we have to do something specific because we are referencing the same article Arabandi is referencing for something else. Nec26 (talk) 00:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Good job on the Military section. Concise and informative.

"He believes that within a polyethnic culture the sum of all the ethnicities, the nation or region as a whole, is less capable of cultural culmination than each of the individual ethnicities that make it up." - Not clear what this is talking about.  Done

I reworded the sentence a little more, making it more direct, and added another sentence for clarification. Let me know if it makes more sense now! Nec26 (talk) 00:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

OK, fix those few things and we're done. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 17:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

GA comments

This topic is important and interesting and definitely deserves a GA level articleon wikipedia. However, I don't think this article is ready to be a GA. I think it fails fundamentally on criteria 3 "Broad in Coverage". To me this is due to a fundamentally flawed decision about how the article should be structured and what it should cover. Basically - it will never be able to provide a broad perspective of the ground it attempots to cover. It fails to provide a good definition of polyethnicity - because it doesn't discuss any of the problems with defining "ethnicity", or the various theories of ethnicity. It also doesn't specify which concept of ethnicity is used in the article (see ethnicity for an overview of these rather substantial problems). It also fails to distinguish sufficiently between polyethnicity as a concept in sociology (which may arguably have been invented by McNeill) and polyethnicity as a phenomena which is something much bigger than that. Furthermore it seems to attempt to give a global perspective on polyethnicity in the politics but instead picks seemingly random countries and treats their politically related problems on a very superficial level. In short I don't believe this article is a suitable candidate for GA status - but rather a suitable candidate forbeing rewritten and restructured. I would be happy to provide commentaries and assistance once a rewrite is under way. ·Maunus·ƛ· 17:39, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

You're comments kinda sound like FA comprehensive rather than GA broad. It's part of a class assignment that ends on the 8th, so I doubt they're going to be able to completely rewrite and expand 3-fold in time. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 18:00, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Well, I realize that I am not reviewing the article and the final decision is up to you (I think you should have conducted the review at the review page by the way), but I don't think it passes the requirement of adressing the most immportant aspects of the topic - I think it fails to establish its topic correctly and to give sufficient background of its history, development, and related scholarship, I also think it goes into unnnecessary detail on the specific kinds of polyethnicity and its consequences in certain countries. The fact that this is a class assignment explains to me why the article is weirdly structured, from the viewpoint of how articles are usually written here - but if I were they're teacher I'd certainly want my students to give a the reader a better definition and summary of the topic before going into details about its political ramifications in modern countries. I wouldn't promote t - if you want to you are of course free to do it.·Maunus·ƛ· 19:59, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

BTW. The article also fails on criteria 1. The lead is not a summary of the entire article - in fact it doesn't mention most of what the rest of the article is about or prepare the reader for it. Read WP:LEAD to check how a lead for a GA should be written. ·Maunus·ƛ· 21:09, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

(reset indent) Hi Maunus, we appreciate your opinion and observations. It's nice to see more perspective on the article. As previously stated, we know that polyethnicity is an extremely broad topic. We have done a lot of research for this project, and we are prepared to defend what the article says.

• The article doesn't discuss the problem with defining ethnicity. Wouldn't that be an argument better placed on the ethnicity page anyways?
• We selected a few "seemingly random" countries to show the effect polyethnicity has on governments (as the section is presented). We are not foolish; we know we could represent all governments that have had conflicts because of polyethnicity. We decided that that was not enough reason to provide specific examples of its effects on politics. Especially seeing as how Wikipedia is a growing phenomenon, the article can only improve with more examples as time progresses and Wikipedia grows.
• I do not see the difference between polyethnicity as a sociological concept and polyethnicity as phenomenon, is the phenomenon not just the concept in practice?
• The lead is probably off. Since it was written the article has undergone a lot of changes. Thanks for bringing that to our attention. We are going to have to check it out again and probably fiddle with it.

Lastly, I just wanted to say that some of your comments are coming off a little rude. I'm sure you're not doing that intentionally. I merely just wanted to let you know that I can read everything you're saying, and some of that could have been worded a little more nicely. Thank you for your time and comments Nec26 (talk) 00:12, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Interesting points. I do think that expanding the "Conceptual history" section and discussing the definition(s) of polyethnicity would be welcome. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 05:05, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

It is my opinion that ethnicity is such a fuzzy concept that you cannot write anything meaningful about it without first giving your reader the benefit of kowing which definition you use. For example it seems that Dr. McNeill may work with a modernist constructivist understanding of ethnicity (e.g. he believes that modern ethnic nations area product of historical processes in the 18th century), the article fleetingly mentions the possibility of situationalist ethnicity (when it mentions the possibility of one person identifying with multiple ethnicities) - but the article otherwise seems to adopt a simplistic view of ethnicity being more or less equal to linguistic group. Never does it explain or justify this. Also it mentions that polyethnicity as a word can also refer to one person identifying with multiple ethnicities, but then goes on to treat only the political polyethnicity without explanation.

As Piotrus I think the conceptual history section is very important and not very well written. It basically seems to say that McNeil invented polyethnicity and that no other scholar has said any meaningful about it before or after him (it doesn't mention any one else). It also seems to be a self contradiction to at once say that polyethnicity has throughout history been the prevailing form of society and then start talking about how it complicates politics. Following McNeil's train of thought what complicated politics was the birth of the ideal of the homogeneous ethnic state.

The history section should also give a much better overview of how polyethnicity has been the standard throughout time and explain the claim of how supposedly the ideal of homogeneous nation states emerged and changed that picture. And it should show the conflict between the homogeneous ideal and the heterogeneous reality in today's world. It should do this by integrating the viewpoints in the criticism section (which seems weirldy appended anyway) into the history section and supply more discussion of the history of ethnicity with examples.

Small stuff: There are references in the article that are not in the reference section for example Safran 2000. There are incomplete references for example "japan times". Is the right name Baramendi or Beramendi? It is a selfcontradiction to say first that polyethnic armies go back to the Mongol khans (and that polyethnicity has been the prevailing sociological model throughout history) and then go on to say that the US were one of the first armies to integrate multiple ethnicities.

I am sure you have done a good job of researching - but the structure of the article is sloppy and does not appear very well thought out yet. And as I have mentioned i don't find it broad enough. ·Maunus·ƛ· 07:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

McNeil is seen as one of the most influential (if not the most influential) scholars writing on polyethnicity: here's a ref that attributes the term specifically to him: [2]. Some others: [3], [4], [5]. In either case, there are still several days for improvement of this article and I hope in those few days it will see some significant edits (although I do agree that there are some issues that would be relevant for Featured class, but are beyond Good class). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to pass this article. It is well written, verifiable, broad, neutral, stable, and has some free iamges. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 05:04, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Archive 1