Talk:Arthur Creech Jones
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group. | ||
 |
It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Organized Labour, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Organized Labour. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. | |
| If you have rated this article please consider adding assessment comments. |
 |
An entry from Arthur Creech Jones appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 22 April 2007. |
 |
[edit] "First colony..."
Hi, I have been drawn here by the link under "Did You Know" on the front page today, which I think contains an error, which comes from this sentence in this article:
Ceylon was the first colony with a non-European majority to obtain its political independence.
I'm assuming that by "colony" this article means "British colony," but there's still a problem with it, which is that it isn't true: India and Pakistan became politically independent the previous year. No doubt it's true that Ceylon was the first non-white jurisdiction under the jurisdiction of the Colonial Office (which was Jones' department, after all) to get its independence, and you could make a semantic argument that the Empire of India wasn't a colony in the sense of being under the Colonial Office, but still: I think most people would consider pre-1947 India to be a colony (and to have a non-European majority to boot). --Jfruh (talk) 01:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
- India was always under a distinct form of governance within the British Empire, while in legal terms never a 'Colony'. The way India was secured under British rule was complex but somewhat different to the way African and West Indian territories were colonised, and its administration was different. So I would say it is both a semantic and legal argument. While India was in wider terms "a colony", the limited space in a DYK? entry does not give an opportunity to mention it. Sam Blacketer 08:54, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- I'm afraid I think that's a rather unhelpful contribution. Firstly, DYK? is a fast-moving template and the entry has gone, so arguing about that now is academic. Distinguishing between Ceylon and India/Pakistan is no mere semantics; India was always regarded as a special case within the British Empire. Ceylon was a Colony just like about 50 other territories across the world. It is clear from the research I did for this article that Arthur Creech Jones felt that it was an achievement to get dominion status for Ceylon because it did not have a majority European population, because he supported independence for all Colonies in the Empire. Sam Blacketer 10:07, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- I think the point is that the vast majority of readers would consider pre-1947 India a colony; it fits the general defintion thereof, even if not the some strict legalistic definition that pertains only to the British Empire. The DYK item as written was very misleading. --Jfruh (talk) 12:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
OK, I think we're on the road to better wording now. The really crucial point isn't just clarity; it's relevance — we have to motivate for the reader why he/she should care that ACJ presided over the first non-white non-India independence; and the answer has to be something to do with the internal culture of the Colonial Office or something like that. Doops | talk 15:15, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
