Talk:New world order (politics): Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 09:38, 8 October 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the New world order (politics) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2: 12 months

Cold War Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cold War, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Cold War 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.Cold WarWikipedia:WikiProject Cold WarTemplate:WikiProject Cold WarCold War
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

International relations Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Globalization Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Globalization, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Globalization on Wikipedia. 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 see a list of open tasks.GlobalizationWikipedia:WikiProject GlobalizationTemplate:WikiProject GlobalizationGlobalization
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Soviet Union Mid‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Mid‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

New world order (politics) received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Why does this article read like a Politico "fact check" piece?

Language like "neither Franklin Roosevelt nor Harry S. Truman used the phrase "new world order" much when speaking publicly" sounds like it's trying really hard to disprove something, rather than actually explaining the concept as an encyclopedia would. And you people wonder why Wikipedia is mocked so harshly as a biased source of information. —Memotype::T 16:23, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Memotype Yes, mocked by those who don’t like mainstream sources, eg Creationists, conspiracy theorists, and those way over to the left or right politically. That’s no surprise. But this isn’t a page to discuss Wikipedia or the New World Order (Politics), which is not about the conspiracy theory. Doug Weller talk 20:25, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You criticize my secondary point, but don't address my main point. Why does this article read like it's trying really hard to disprove something that hasn't even been brought up yet in the article? This is clearly not written from a NPOV, and your defensiveness only emphasizes my point. —Memotype::T 18:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Memotype then put your money where your mouth is and take it to WP:NPOVN if you are so sure. Doug Weller talk 19:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea, thanks. —Memotype::T 17:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it reads weirdly. How notable is it that two figures didn’t invoke a concept/use a phrase often? It doesn’t seem like it should be included in the lede, and if it’s included at all, it should be in the context of notability, which I understand is some controversy over whether these two used the term much(?). As it stands, context-less in the lede, it seems like a really unimportant inclusion, and I do assume as a reader that there’s some attempted mythbusting happening that I haven’t been clued in on. Zanahary (talk) 04:16, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turns out that those parts were all original research anyways. Zanahary (talk) 03:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent changes to the lead seem to remove quite a few citations. DN (talk) 03:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those citations were (unless I missed some good ones) didn't support the text they were supposed to cite, or were being used for original research/synthesis. Zanahary (talk) 03:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Indeed, in some instances when Roosevelt used the phrase "new world order", or "new order in the world" it was to refer to Axis powers plans for world domination." The citation from The American Presidency Project states..."Hitler has often protested that his plans for conquest do not extend across the Atlantic Ocean. His submarines and raiders prove otherwise. So does the entire design of his new world order."

This seems to corroborate the accuracy of the citation. Therefore I'm reverting your sweeping edit. I suggest you address changes incrementally to achieve consensus. DN (talk) 04:35, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. What do you think of the newer revision? Zanahary (talk) 04:56, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Much better, thank you for the extra effort to find consensus, it is appreciated. I agree the search engine is awkward as a citation, and I'm not sure how policy applies there. Let's see if other editors weigh in. DN (talk) 06:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History

Explain what was the new world order after 1945 103.239.160.49 (talk) 08:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{Talkheader|archive_age=1|archive_units=year}}
+{{Talkheader}}
 {{User:MiszaBot/config
 | algo                = old(365d)
@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 | minthreadsleft      = 1
 }}
-{{WikiProject banner shell|1=
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1=
-{{WikiProject Cold War history|class=C|importance=mid}}
+{{WikiProject Cold War|importance=mid}}
-{{WikiProject Politics|class=C|importance=mid}}
+{{WikiProject Politics|importance=mid}}
-{{WikiProject International relations|class=C|importance=mid}}
+{{WikiProject International relations|importance=mid}}
-{{WikiProject_Globalization|class=C|importance=mid}}
+{{WikiProject Globalization|importance=mid}}
-{{WikiProject_Soviet Union|class=C|importance=mid}}
+{{WikiProject Soviet Union|importance=mid}}
-{{WikiProject_United States|class=C|importance=mid}}
+{{WikiProject United States|importance=mid}}
 }}
 {{old peer review |archivelink=Wikipedia:Peer review/New World Order (political)/archive1}}
+== Why does this article read like a Politico "fact check" piece? ==
-== Carl Schmitt ==
-Should there be a mention of [[Carl Schmitt#Nomos_of_the_Earth|Carl Schmitt]]? --[[User:Rkos|Rkos]] ([[User talk:Rkos|talk]]) 18:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
+Language like "neither Franklin Roosevelt nor Harry S. Truman used the phrase "new world order" much when speaking publicly" sounds like it's trying ''really'' hard to disprove something, rather than actually explaining the concept as an encyclopedia would. And you people wonder why Wikipedia is mocked so harshly as a biased source of information. &mdash;''[[User:Memotype|Memotype]]''::<small>'''[[User talk:Memotype|T]]'''</small> 16:23, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
-:Please explain why and how you think he should be mentioned in the article. --[[User:Loremaster|Loremaster]] ([[User talk:Loremaster|talk]]) 18:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
+:@[[User:Memotype|Memotype]] Yes, mocked by those who don’t like mainstream sources, eg Creationists, conspiracy theorists, and those way over to the left or right politically. That’s no surprise. But this isn’t a page to discuss Wikipedia or the New World Order (Politics), which is not about the conspiracy theory. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 20:25, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
-::Schmitt wrote a book called "The Nomos of the Earth in the International Law of the ''Jus Publicum Europaeum''".  In Part I, Chapter 4, Schmitt defines "''nomos''" as the spatial constitution of a political order.  The thrust of the book is that Europe created a spatially-oriented order in the colonial period of their history (as it emerged from the ''Respublica Christiana'' of the Medieval period), but that with the League of Nations and later the United Nations that spatial ordering of international politics/law was lost in an undifferentiated universalism.  The question of the "new ''nomos'' of the earth" is more or less the same as asking the "new world order," but with a more specific theoretical/historical meaning.&mdash;[[User:Perceval|Perceval]] 18:31, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
+::You criticize my secondary point, but don't address my main point. Why does this article read like it's trying ''really'' hard to disprove something that hasn't even been brought up yet in the article? This is clearly not written from a NPOV, and your defensiveness only emphasizes my point. &mdash;''[[User:Memotype|Memotype]]''::<small>'''[[User talk:Memotype|T]]'''</small> 18:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
+:::@[[User:Memotype|Memotype]] then put your money where your mouth is and take it to [[WP:NPOVN]] if you are so sure. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 19:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
+::::Good idea, thanks. &mdash;''[[User:Memotype|Memotype]]''::<small>'''[[User talk:Memotype|T]]'''</small> 17:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
+:I agree that it reads weirdly. How notable is it that two figures ''didn’t'' invoke a concept/use a phrase often? It doesn’t seem like it should be included in the lede, and if it’s included at all, it should be in the context of notability, which I understand is some controversy over whether these two used the term much(?). As it stands, context-less in the lede, it seems like a really unimportant inclusion, and I do assume as a reader that there’s some attempted mythbusting happening that I haven’t been clued in on. [[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]] ([[User talk:Zanahary|talk]]) 04:16, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
+::Turns out that those parts were all original research anyways. [[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]] ([[User talk:Zanahary|talk]]) 03:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
+:::Your [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=New_world_order_%28politics%29&diff=1202594889&oldid=1199043835 recent changes to the lead] seem to remove quite a few citations. [[User:Darknipples|DN]] ([[User talk:Darknipples|talk]]) 03:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
+::::Those citations were (unless I missed some good ones) didn't support the text they were supposed to cite, or were being used for original research/synthesis. [[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]] ([[User talk:Zanahary|talk]]) 03:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
+:::::"Indeed, in some instances when Roosevelt used the phrase "new world order", or "new order in the world" it was to refer to [[Axis powers]] plans for world domination." The citation from [https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-for-navy-and-total-defense-day The American Presidency Project] states..."Hitler has often protested that his plans for conquest do not extend across the Atlantic Ocean. His submarines and raiders prove otherwise. So does the entire design of his new world order."
+:::::This seems to corroborate the accuracy of the citation. Therefore I'm reverting your sweeping edit. I suggest you address changes incrementally to achieve consensus. [[User:Darknipples|DN]] ([[User talk:Darknipples|talk]]) 04:35, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
+::::::Got it. What do you think of the newer revision? [[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]] ([[User talk:Zanahary|talk]]) 04:56, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
+:::::::Much better, thank you for the extra effort to find consensus, it is appreciated. I agree the search engine is awkward as a citation, and I'm not sure how policy applies there. Let's see if other editors weigh in. [[User:Darknipples|DN]] ([[User talk:Darknipples|talk]]) 06:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
-== Weishaupt ==
+== History ==
-[[Adam Weishaupt]] advocated a nwo. The entire notion of the new world order was to replace the old world order-holy roman empire. The American and French revolutions were one of the first moves towards this nwo when Napoleon arrested the Pope and seized the [[Papal States]]. There are many well referenced books written along this line of history. [[Special:Contributions/72.161.237.209|72.161.237.209]] ([[User talk:72.161.237.209|talk]]) 18:04, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
-:Please provide [[Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources|reliable sources]] to support your claims. --[[User:Loremaster|Loremaster]] ([[User talk:Loremaster|talk]]) 18:53, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
+Explain what was the new world order after 1945 [[Special:Contributions/103.239.160.49|103.239.160.49]] ([[User talk:103.239.160.49|talk]]) 08:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
-==No disambiguation?==
-The term has been used in several cases, as the article shows. I also think they have enough importance to merit at least a redirect to another page. And something under "see also."  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/69.255.98.244|69.255.98.244]] ([[User talk:69.255.98.244|talk]]) 00:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
-== Sterile ==
-This article is so absolutely antiseptic in content that I'm scared to even edit it for fear that what I edit will be deleted promptly. Even the quote attributed to Noam Chomsky makes it appear that his view on the subject is less radical than it actually is. I don't understand people who edit articles that only have a dispassionate interest in the subject. It makes me wonder where they're coming from, and furthermore, what their motive is. Not that they'd ever tell me. I choose not to respond to a defense of these statements. Any goading into an argument about what should be done to improve this article seems pointless. I believe that the ones who edit articles like this know how to improve them but for some reason choose not to. It's just a belief. [[User:Lighthead|<b><font color="#CCCC00">'''Lighthead'''</font></b>]] [[User talk:Lighthead|<sup>þ</sup>]] 02:53, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
-== Wilson's Fourteen Points ==
-Where exactly does he use the phrase "new world order" in that speech? Here is the full text, for reference: https://wwi.lib.byu.edu/index.php/President_Wilson%27s_Fourteen_Points
-[[Special:Contributions/67.87.199.20|67.87.199.20]] ([[User talk:67.87.199.20|talk]]) 03:41, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
-: I added some explanation on that point in [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=New_world_order_%28politics%29&type=revision&diff=888457091&oldid=882957093 this edit]. It doesn't seem that Wilson used the exact phrase "new world order" in any prominent public speech; however, he did use similar phrases, and the exact phrase was being used at that time in the period <u>toward the end of</u> <s>after</s> the First World War. [[User:Jjjjjjjjjj|Jjjjjjjjjj]] ([[User talk:Jjjjjjjjjj|talk]]) 08:32, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
-== External links modified ==
-Hello fellow Wikipedians,
-I have just modified 13 external links on [[New world order (politics)]]. Please take a moment to review [[special:diff/815364151|my edit]]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160602115313/http://millercenter.org/president/bush/speeches/speech-3425 to http://millercenter.org/president/bush/speeches/speech-3425
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110531214717/http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/pal/pal10.htm to http://www.al-bab.com/Arab/docs/pal/pal10.htm
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090121063703/http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page1661 to http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page1661
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081206033734/http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page1765 to http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page1765
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100113232033/http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/press_146_01.htm to http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/press_146_01.htm
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081208114506/http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page14323 to http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page14323
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090310113516/http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/speech_chex_150507.htm to http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/speech_chex_150507.htm
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090125072232/http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/press_68_07.htm to http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/press_68_07.htm
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090130134829/http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page15268 to http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page15268
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090130140146/http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page15303 to http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page15303
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090219124613/http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=85972&sectionid=351020101 to http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=85972&sectionid=351020101
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120830041459/http://presstv.com/detail/2012/05/26/243242/ahmadinejad-new-world-order/ to http://presstv.com/detail/2012/05/26/243242/ahmadinejad-new-world-order/
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080820115703/http://www.huliq.com/66212/saakashvili-calls-new-world-order to http://www.huliq.com/66212/saakashvili-calls-new-world-order
-When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
-{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
-Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 11:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
-== New World Order  ==
-What has caused the wording error in the first paragraph ?  <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/69.91.64.15|69.91.64.15]] ([[User talk:69.91.64.15#top|talk]]) 01:38, 30 September 2019 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
-: I'm not sure what you are referring to. What specific wording error in the first paragraph? [[User:Jjjjjjjjjj|Jjjjjjjjjj]] ([[User talk:Jjjjjjjjjj|talk]]) 21:20, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
-== "Hitler also used the term in 1928"[5]   - Link does not contain the term ==
-The page currently includes "Hitler also used the term in 1928."[5]
-The "[5]" links to https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-0IryYbwVIPGFodSS/Hitler%20-%20New%20World%20Order%20%281928%29_djvu.txt
-That file does not contain the term "New World Order".
-Nor does it contain the term "New Order" (which Hitler did use elsewhere).
-There are 168 references to "order".
-It does discuss a hypothetical war between France and Germany, stating that France would be "under the protection of a new world coalition", so "Germany would be exposed to the concentrated attacks of all Western Europe."
-Hitler did not write "new world coalition" (meaning "Western Europe") with the same meaning as "new world order".
-Hitler was not idealizing a new world order.
-The new world order was an impediment to his ambitions.
-Should the inclusion of Hitler's 1928 writing be eliminated or stated differently on this page?
-Readers may think Hitler championed the idea of a New World Order, and for that reason we should fight against the New World Order.  <!-- Template:Unsigned -->{{small|1=<span class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Caregiver|Caregiver]] ([[User talk:Caregiver#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Caregiver|contribs]]) 17:37, 17 November 2020 (UTC)</span>}} <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->