User talk:Jza84/Sandbox2

Some comments

I'm happy with the criteria. It may be useful to identify on this page what the criteria are on the "English people", "Scottish people", etc etc. pages are as well, so that people can see that there is an attempt to minimise duplication and that there are different time periods covered. I'm not sure about picking out Kelly Holmes specifically - it may be better simply to draw people's attention to the fact that the article covers various definitions of "British people", not just a narrowly-defined "ethnic" definition. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, on reflection. Do you have a way in which this could be worded? :S --Jza84 |  Talk  20:20, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

How about:

Why do some of the pictures show people who are clearly not wholly ethnically British?

Because the article is about "British people", which is a category that includes both those of British ancestry and those who are British citizens.

Does that cover it? Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:46, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I see the angle this is coming from. I'd go further though - I'm concerned about what constitues "ethnically British" people (any kind of agreed-upon defintion alludes my searching!). I also think we need a broader question that addresses the text as well as the image. --Jza84 |  Talk  20:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

The article falls within WP:WikiProject Ethnic groups, where there are some useful cautionary words about "ethnic groups". For example:-

Two facts that are particular to articles within the scope of this WikiProject place a special burden of proof upon editors:

* It is a fact of human nature that discussions become heated over issues which mount a challenge (real or imagined) to the identity that individuals have constructed for themselves. A related fact is that issues of ethnicity (however the term is defined) are all too frequently issues of identity. By extension, the content of pages that are within the scope of this WikiProject can be the source of both heated debate and hasty, unverified assertions.

* Moreover, as Franz Boas pointed out at the beginning of the twentieth century, language, culture, and race vary independently, and no inferences can be made from one to the others in the absence of very precise evidence.

For these reasons, the need for accurately, verifiably and reliably sourced information for articles within the scope of this WikiProject cannot be understated.

I don't know whether there's anyone involved in that project who would be able to give specific guidance on "British people" - probably not, and there will be those who would question it anyway. I think it may be best simply to state that issues of ethnicity and identity are contentious and not clear-cut, and that the content of the page is guided by the WikiProject, recognises that "British people" can mean different things to different people, and therefore the article takes an inclusive approach which covers both genetic heritage and citizenship. (Or something like that!) Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:11, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I've expanded the Q and As, effectively putting your point into an answer. How does that look now? --Jza84 |  Talk  13:51, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Who else should this be flagged up with, to get a healthy consensus? Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:46, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Well I'm putting my usual area of work on hold to try and improve the British people page a little. I've just been horrified by its lack of development. Once a suitable lead is in place (and broadly agreed upon), I'll be happy to take this FAQ to the talk page to see how we all feel about it. --Jza84 |  Talk  17:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)