From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move 22 May 2024

Anti-Normanism Normanism – The article starts with "Anti-Normanism is an opposition to Normanism, the mainstream narrative..." I find it weird that the mainstream theory of Normanism is but a section inside the fringe theory. The article must be moved and reshuffled upside down. - Altenmann >talk 19:33, 22 May 2024 (UTC) reply

Alternative - How about "Normanist controversy" instead? I agree that we should privilege the mainstream view in the title, but "Normanism" seems like it won't describe much of the article's content, which is on both Normanism and Anti-Normanism. "Normanist controversy" also seems to be the WP:COMMONNAME for the topic as used in scholarship. Psychastes ( talk) 19:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
What do you mean "not much"? The section "Normanism" is larger than "Anti-Normanism". About your suggestion: "Normanist controversy" is essentially about controversy of the fringe view against the mainstream view, so, again, it is WP:UNDUE to put the discussion of the fringe interpretation into article title. - Altenmann >talk 19:35, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
There was an RM for "Normanist controversy" back in January 2022. Srnec ( talk) 20:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
Indeed. Looks like many of the oppose votes then were based on the supposition that "Anti-Normanism" was a better title for indicating that this was a WP:FRINGE viewpoint and that "Normanism" was a false equivalence term only used by anti-normanists. Perhaps "Anti-Normanist controversy" would be more appropriate? Psychastes ( talk) 21:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
"Normanism" was a false equivalence term only used by anti-normanists - sorry, wrong. It is a mainstream term. See the well-developed well-referenced ruwiki article: ru:Норманская теория. - Altenmann >talk 22:26, 23 May 2024 (UTC) reply
I agree, both "Normanism" and "anti-Normanism" are widely used terms. For example they are used to describe the two camps after the 18th century. This is where the "Normanist theory" or "Normanist controversy" arose. See for example The Oxford History of Historical Writing: Volume 3: 1400-1800 p. 299. Britannica has a brief overview. Mellk ( talk) 12:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
There was only one mainstream theory, namely origins from Varangians, and a bunch of alternative theories of varying degree of crackpottery, collectively known as "anti-Normanism", i.e., anti-Normanism is not a coherent theory. That's why it is named "anti-": its only common denominator is that all of them tried hard to reject the idea of Scandinavian origin of Rus'. - Altenmann >talk 15:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
The "Normanist theory" was originally criticized and new ideas to support a supposedly Slavic origin were created. Then it was eventually accepted by most, although this fluctuated e.g. with rise of Hitler. Mellk ( talk) 16:23, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply
@ Mellk:Correct. It was criticized from its very origin in mid-18th century. But what is your opinion about article title? - Altenmann >talk 17:02, 24 May 2024 (UTC) reply