Talk:Banausos

Old version of this talk page

The old version of this talk page is archived at Talk:Banausos/archive 1. It referred to a previous form of the article, which has been extensively rewritten.

This page did not need to be archived!!! This new article has been sanitized and cleaned. This article is not what was supposed to be originally. Much of the context of the word, like the disappearance of any connection to "peasant warriors" or "warrior ethos", gives a false impression. I grant that it is more technical but it has been cleansed of material harmful to democracy and to philodemocrats/socialists.

For the original article go to Wikinfo: banavsos. WHEELER 17:52, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

The present article distorts the facts a bit in suggesting that a prejudice against manual artisans was confined for the most part to the "extreme oligarchs" and to philosophers like Plato and Aristotle. In fact, the prejudice prevailed among almost all wealthy Athenians of the time. See the Oxford Classical Dictionary, 3rd edition, p. 185 and p. 178. Plato and Aristotle were simply reflecting a belief common among those in power, oligarchs and "democrats" alike. Isokrates 22:12, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Which word are you citing? Some editors have the online OCD. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:21, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• To answer my own questions: "Artisans" asserts that artisans were limited in oligarchic cities, and for Athens mentions only "the condescension of Athenian 'intellectuals'" (scare quotes in OCD), while pointing out that Athenian artisans themselves appear to have been proud of their crafts.
• "Art" again, mentions an "aristocratic point of view" and "social and philosophical thought" while noting that there were exceptions, even for Xenophon: Phidias, Polyclitus, Parrhasius, and Zeuxis were respected, and Phidias and Praxiteles were among the wealthy Athenians of their time. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 22:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Clearly written by those with expertise

Most of the time the issue with wikipedia articles tends to be something related to the community-at-large's emphasis on pop culture. So it was nice to find an article that (for example) doesn't cite the last time the "banausos" was used in an episode of The Simpsons.

But I had to resort to tagging this article with {{Multiple issues}} anyway. With a lack of inline references, it's hard for someone whose not an expert on the topic to help improve the article.

For example, why is this in the introduction: "The epic heroes call their smiths δημιουργοί – dēmiourgoi." There is no clear development of this idea in the body of the article, so it was tempting to add a WP:LEAD issue on top of what I already introduced. There's also this: "These were the Laconophiles who yearned for the good old times when there was none of this 'equality' nonsense, and you could beat your neighbor's slave in the street (see Ps.-Xenophon: Constitution of Athens)" but clicking through to Constitution of the Athenians doesn't help explain this yearning for the good ol' days. The term "arete" is used twice, with no context that helps the reader understand what connotations associated with the term are being referenced.

I came here wanting some context around banausic, and got mired in esoterica that I don't think belongs in a Wikipedia article, at least not without a few paragraphs and prefatory sections for the lay person. 67.101.6.102 (talk) 22:02, 19 November 2010 (UTC)