Content deleted Content added
→Place of Birth: cmt |
→Place of Birth: comment |
||
Line 180:
*[[Ping|Kiteinthewind]]Something to consider. While your addition is sourced there is no definitive position one way or the other as to whether British India should be used in the article. However, if the term is not used in most of the sources you might consider that per [[WP:WEIGHT]] the term is not necessary. To be honest, if it were me I'd remove the term since whether it is used or not is a matter of agreement among editors with a slight leaning towards the weight of sources that don't use the term. Sometimes its better in cases like this where there is so much pain attached to the words and where there is no definitive position to just make it easy on everyone and remove the content.([[User:Littleolive oil|Littleolive oil]] ([[User talk:Littleolive oil|talk]]) 23:01, 30 October 2017 (UTC))
::{{reply|Littleolive oil}} I can't say I agree with that at all. No matter how totally ashamed of Britains colonial past I might feel (speaking as a Brit), the fact of the matter is that the country was, at that point, known as [[British India]]. The whole point of Wikipedia is to present the facts. If we're not doing that, and we allow personal feelings to prejudice our edits or omit information, then our encyclopedia becomes tarnished. That's why we have [[WP:NPOV|NPOV policies]]. <font style="background: #6fd6f5" face="Monospace" color="#98285c">[[User:Nzd|Nzd]] [[User talk:Nzd|(talk)]]</font> 23:35, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
::{{reply|Littleolive oil}} And the "editors" you mentioned, Littleolive oil, consist of one registered user, and other IP accounts, which could be construed as canvassing on their part, and highly inappropriate. [[User:Kiteinthewind|Kiteinthewind]] <sup>[[User talk:Kiteinthewind|Leave a message!]]</sup> 01:22, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I think you misunderstand what I'm saying. The point of Wikipedia is to present what is in the sources. Only one source so far calls this area British India. What this means is that sources point, per Wikipedia weight, to content that does not necessarily include the term British India. However, Wikpedia also depends on editor agreement, on consensus. This means that in the case where content is not necessarily definitive we have the option to choose and to go with editor agreement and choice. This content is not critical in this article. The content has created disharmony up to the point where the article has been locked. No, we don't change content to please the editors. We can consider going with editor agreement only because and after, all of the other points are in place.
| |||