This article is deeply flawed. Where to start?
- The article duplicates the scope of the preexisting Hinduism in the United Kingdom article.
- The article continually conflates Hindus with Indians, and Muslims with Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. For example, what does the unemployment rate of British Indians (a category that includes Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, Jains, Christians, etc.) have to do with "UK Hindu Identity"?
- The article can be summarized in a line: "British Hindus are smart, wealthy, and good-looking, and hate being associated with evil Pakistani and Bangladeshi riot-causing terrorist-loving Muslims." It's racist, essentializing, full of unlabeled POV, and consists almost entirely of original research.
I suggest deletion. --Anirvan 03:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
Please note that
- The article does not say that British Hindus are "good-looking". Actually since a significant fraction of British Pakistanis are Mirpuri ("Kashmiri"), they are lighter skinned and have sharper features.
- The statistics on ethnic education, employment etc. are compiled, and discussed by the British government itself.
- The question of British Hindu identity has been disussed by the press, and the fact that a common label is considered inappropriate by the Hindus.
- Overwhelming majority of people from Bangladesh and Pakistan are indeed Muslim, and overwhelming majority of Hindus are from India (some arriving through Africa).
Ethnic groups in UK are different. The UK government recognizes that.
--ISKapoor 17:44, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Hi ISKapoor. The "good looking" comment was a joke; I'm sorry it wasn't clear.
It doesn't matter whether or not your compilation of pointed facts are individually true or not; they still constitute POV original research, per Wikipedia guidelines. And for that matter, the scope of the article still duplicates the scope of the preexisting Hinduism in the United Kingdom and British Asian articles.
The article currently reads:
- "Many, perhaps most, UK Hindus do not wish to be identified with Pakistanis and Bangladeshi, and thus do not wish to be called 'Asian'"
Now contrast that to the text of the recent report commissioned by the Hindu Forum of Britain, which reads:
- "The focus group participants were (unsurprisingly) unable to reach unanimity on the way in which they express their identity. Some went as far as claiming that identifying as 'Hindu' was challenging due to their religious and philosophical beliefs in pluralism..however a great deal of agreement that categorisation as 'Asians' was an inadequate and led to confusion...For many the description of an identity as 'Hindu' was an attempt to correct others' assumptions in the light of the political context in which Islamophobia is widespread and much contemporary political focus has been placed on British Muslims...Similarly, the label 'BME' [Black and Minority Ethnic] was felt as inadequate and difficult for some to identify with...Many chose to describe themselves as Indian in order to express their ties with India...Other contemporary self-definitions referred to 'Desi'"
The research suggests that British Hindus aren't all comfortable with the word "Asian," in light of Islamophobia and the increasing internal cultural/linguistic/religious fragmentation of the Asian community, but that there's no consensus on a common term to be used instead. Some prefer religious identity, others prefer national identity, other prefer pan-South Asian diasporic identity.
This is utterly different from what the Wikipedia article says.
This isn't a British Hindu-specific issue; rather, this is very closely linked to related questions being brought up among various sectors of the British Asian community. For example, British Bangladeshi Muslims are having to choose between a variety of labels like British Asian, British Muslim, British Bengali, or British Bangladeshi.
The article as it stands right now significantly dumbs down the debate around the fragmentation of British Asian identity.
If there's anything worth saving, I suggest that this article be merged into the Hinduism in the United Kingdom and British Asian articles.
--Anirvan 20:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)