Talk:Wonderism

Language in the block quotations
These quotations seem to have been translated directly into English from a book in French by a non-native speaker. It doesn't seem that a quotation from a translated book would be in incorrect English like this, e.g. "anxious of novelty" in the first quotation, or the incorrect punctuation and grammar in the second. Evangeline (talk) 23:00, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Lacouperie's idiosyncratic term "wonderism" refers to the Jixia Academy. Shouldn't these articles be merged? Keahapana (talk) 02:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

There seems to be no reason to merge this article with the odd conjectures of a writer of 100 years ago, whose work on this subject is not taken seriously by modern scholars.

The only mentions of Lacouperie I can find in modern scholarly writing refer to his "peculiar argument," his "fantasies," his "strange and short-lived form of ... Orientalism" and calls him "eccentric" and a "self-proclaimed classical scholar." Other slighting mentions by modern scholars include: "Lacouperie copied Vissering copiously (including the errors), without acknowledgment" and "Had modern scholars scrutinized Lacouperie closely in the context..." and "Lacouperie's flimsy etymological exercise...." and "Lacouperie, who introduced the first faked evidence...." Lacouperie is also mentioned as "victim of a hoax" about a Formosan alphabet.

I could not find anyone associated with a modern university who cited Lacouperie in any way except as an outmoded or actually misguided scholar of long ago.

Does not sound like someone to be cited in a reliable article. Evangeline (talk) 22:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)