Talk:Xenophilia

Biology Low‑importance

	Biology portal Xenophilia is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Psychology Low‑importance

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Culture Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CultureWikipedia:WikiProject CultureTemplate:WikiProject Cultureculture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

XXXenophilia?

The reference to the book XXXenophilia in the "in fiction" section really seems like spam. If not spam, its definitely written like an advert.

Trust me on this, Phil Foglio don't need spam to get his comic books to sell. The book is notorious among comic fans for its humorous and lewd depictions of human/alien intercourse. Phil Foglio has also produced art for Magic: The Gathering, Dragon Magazine, an adaptation of Robert Asprin's novels, and his own intellectual properties Buck Godot and Girl Genius. He is a well-known member of both the comics and fantasy/sci-fi communities. If removing the reference ever comes to a referendum, consider this my vote to keep. --75.161.67.70 00:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Xenophily?

Umm, if it is more commonly referred to as Xenophilia, why exactly are we calling it Xenophily here? Personally, I've never heard that form used in my life for any of the various -philias. - ShadowOutlaw 08:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well. I have moved it now to Xenophilia for the obvious reasons. Sigurd Dragon Slayer (talk) 19:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some possible problems in the article

1) "a person may date someone of another race not because they like them as people but specifically because they are different"

That seems to describe some kind of strategic social manipulation, rather than an ordinary non-pathological psychological philia. Most often, people with an X-philia find those with quality X (here being of another culture or race), in addition to other attractive characteristics, to be especially alluring and enticing overall...

2) "In politics"

As those listening to George Washington at the time would have been well aware, at the time people who leaned right in U.S. politics tended to have sympathy with Great Britain, while people who leaned left in U.S. politics tended to have sympathy with France. George Washington was advising against all such "Foreign entanglements", and that the U.S. steer an independent course in international relations, but I don't think that he was really speaking out against the concept of xenophilia in general... AnonMoos (talk) 17:18, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Xenophilia

"Xenophily" is very uncommon, somebody please move it (I don't have the right to do so).--Me ne frego (talk) 00:53, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could possibly partially merge with Allophilia... AnonMoos (talk) 13:05, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved per common name. Given that the original xenophilia page is an unsourced stub, I don't think it particularly important to restore its history here, though I'm not opposed. I've moved Talk:Xenophily to Talk:Xenophilia/Archive 1. DrKiernan (talk) 17:34, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Xenophily → Xenophilia – Xenophily is not the most common term for the concept by far. Google Books comes up with 63 hits for xenophily, but as many as 5,900 hits for xenophilia, which should be clear-cut enough. Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:45, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Support I agree, Xenophilia is more common. Lova Falk talk 19:48, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Xenophilia is the common name. I don't know why it was moved to this awkward title. Hill Crest's WikiLaser! (BOOM!) 20:18, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support a better match for all the other -philias and -phobias. Hekerui (talk) 16:10, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Improve article, then demerge/move later This article contains too much OR to make an informed move. The xenophily/biology is a mess and xenophoby also redirects to xenophobia which has nothing to do with biology. In ictu oculi (talk) 03:56, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Hold on... this page Xenophily hasn't been moved to this awkward title. Rather, it and Xenophilia started as independent articles [1] [2] and have never been merged. So some care is needed with the histories, and IMO both talk pages should be preserved. I suggest a merge rather than a move. Andrewa (talk) 01:49, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

In politics and history

"George Washington, in his 1796 Farewell Address, described the influence of attachment of one nation for another, which he saw as negative:"

*

Philoxenia, anyone ?

Philoxenia (from the Greek φιλοξενία, philo-xenia) is an English noun, meaning an act of hospitableness and welcome, particularly towards those formerly unknown. [philo, fondness, affection + xenia, strangers].

The Greek word is well-known, and dates back at least 2,000 years. it is often translated as hospitable, hospitably, or hospitality, depending on the ending of the word. Philoxenia is a well-known and most welcoming name for hotels in Greece.

Is xeno-philia, (antonym of xeno-phobia, fear of strangers) the same as philo-xenia? The Greek roots strongly suggest to me that it is. The 'syntax' is reversed, but this is not unusual when translating compound foreign words into close English equivalents. If these points are valid, I suggest that place be given to philoxenia, which goes beyond 'xenia'. --Observer6 (talk) 17:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The two words obviously have related etymologies, but I don't think they're exactly synonymous. Philoxenia refers to concrete acts of charity/hospitality in ancient Greek culture, while Xenophily is a general term for psychological preferences... AnonMoos (talk) 08:09, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you must be right. Thanks. --Observer6 (talk) 22:53, 3 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]