Talk:Social exclusion

alienation being connected to an individual's childhood relationships

this stood out to me, just wanted to invite the person who added this verbiage to expound on this more 2603:8000:BF42:8E9:F4AC:D2C:3024:BA82 (talk) 21:07, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

"Marginalized" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Marginalized has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 April 17 § Marginalized until a consensus is reached. GustaPapp (talk) 00:02, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

'Anti-Zionism'

This is generally a badly written and unencyclopaedic article but I am especially concerned by the references to 'Anti-Zionism' in the body and 'see also'. This is clearly not NPOV and is vague enough to be largely meaningless anyway. I believe I can make a convincing argument that Zionism is itself an inherently exclusionary ideology (typically through racism towards other groups but I personally know several Jewish people who have been shunned by their former places of worship for their opposition to Zionism) but this is obviously a matter of opinion, not fact. Therefore, why should the opposite, equally subjective perspective be allowed to stand here? 2A02:8084:4F43:8E00:988E:B47A:7E95:2EB (talk) 17:19, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

You can add that information provided you find RS to that effect. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 22:50, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Let's obtain consensus about each detail of the Zionism section.

Zionism

See also: Zionist as a pejorative

In 2024, a Canadian graduate school instructor produced a syllabus that declared “this classroom is a space free of sexism, racism, Zionism, homophobia, and all other forms of social violence.” The university president responded that the instructor was discriminating against pro-Israel students based on creed. Support for Israel was noted to be a 'litmus test' leading to social exclusion of Jewish students at many campuses following the October 7 Hamas-led attacks on Israel. In 2024 following many harassment complaints, the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign banned the ostracizing of Jewish students from school clubs for identifying as Zionist. According to David Seymour, antizionism’s claim that it is only 'Zionists' and not 'the Jews' who are demonized gains its justification. The ideology of antizionism portrays Zionists as freely choosing evil and its harmfulness, legitimizing the demand for exclusion and passing the responsibility for the exclusion onto the excluded themselves. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 22:48, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Pinging @Callanecc who protected this section last time it was removed. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 23:03, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

As an update, it has been removed again, without discussion. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 23:04, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

First, I have to ask, why was this section added without the correct mark-up identifying it as a subsection? From what I can see, you are the sole author of the section, and you have shown across multiple articles you know how to use the correct mark-up for subsections.

On the issues:

1. As an article discussing social exclusion, it should cover the breadth of the topic, and not focus overly on specific cases.
2. Related to the previous point, the sub-section is larger than six other sections in the article, and about as large as the parent section it was placed in.
3. Considering the exclusion of the examples provided is based specifically on a political ideology, its inclusion should be as part of a section on social exclusion based on politics.
4. This is more an issue with the whole article, but there is an exclusive focus (in the sub-section) on North America, so the article as a whole needs to be edited to include a global breadth of the topic.

These are the immediate issues that made up the reasoning for the Reversion. -- Cdjp1 (talk) 08:33, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

I don't find any of these points to be valid but would certainly welcome input from other editors. Allthemilescombined1 (talk) 11:01, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

References

Why is another article with a different topic redirected to this article?

I don't understand why the article called Inclusive society was redirected to the article on Social exclusion. I wanted to create an article in English called Inclusive society, but I automatically received a warning that an article with the same name already exists and if I created one, all content would be redirected to that article. When I clicked on the provided link, I saw an article on a completely different topic called social exclusion. Inclusive society topic talks about ways to create such a society, its features, etc. Social exclusion, on the other hand, talks about the reasons that distance people from inclusion, lead them to social exclusion, and the groups that are subject to social exclusion. I don't think these are the same topics. Can experienced users of the English Wikipedia answer me about this? PinkEmaa (talk) 05:07, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi, PinkEmaa. You can edit the text at the redirect and create a new article there, removing the redirect. But it is worth looking at the edit summaries about why the redirect is in place, here. To avoid the possibility of having your new article reverted to the redirect, I would suggest you start by adding the content in the existing Social inclusion section of the Social exclusion article. Once you are happy with it there, it could be moved to a separate article. I would also look at the existing articles on Social connection, Prosocial behavior, Community cohesion and Group cohesiveness, to see if the topic would be a good fit in any of those (it may well not be! But it's always easier to develop an existing article than start from scratch, if you can). Best wishes, Tacyarg (talk) 22:24, 4 September 2026 (UTC)