Talk:New world order (politics): Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
ShelfSkewed (talk | contribs) Removed maintenance template—links fixed |
m Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30) |
||
(37 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talkheader}} |
|||
{{Talk header|search=yes}} |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|||
⚫ | |||
| algo = old(365d) |
|||
⚫ | |||
| archive = Talk:New world order (politics)/Archive %(counter)d |
|||
⚫ | |||
| counter = 2 |
|||
⚫ | |||
| maxarchivesize = 100K |
|||
{{WikiProject_Globalization|class=C|importance=mid}} |
|||
| archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |
|||
⚫ | |||
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|||
⚫ | |||
| minthreadsleft = 1 |
|||
}} |
}} |
||
⚫ | |||
{|class="messagebox standard-talk" |
|||
⚫ | |||
|- |
|||
⚫ | |||
|[[Image:Nuvola apps xmag.png|48px|Peer review]] |
|||
⚫ | |||
|align="center"|This article had a [[Wikipedia:Peer review|peer review]] that has been '''[[Wikipedia:Peer review/New World Order (political)/archive1|archived]]'''. It may contain ideas that you can use to improve this article. |
|||
{{WikiProject Globalization|importance=mid}} |
|||
[[Category:Old requests for peer review|{{ARTICLESPACE}}{{PAGENAME}}]] |
|||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
⚫ | |||
== Carl Schmitt == |
|||
{{old peer review |archivelink=Wikipedia:Peer review/New World Order (political)/archive1}} |
|||
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) |
|||
: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) |
|||
::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.—[[User:Perceval|Perceval]] 18:31, 8 February 2012 (UTC) |
|||
== Weishaupt == |
|||
[[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) |
|||
==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--> |
|||
⚫ | |||
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§ionid=351020101 to http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=85972§ionid=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. |
|||
== Why does this article read like a Politico "fact check" piece? == |
|||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} |
|||
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. —''[[User:Memotype|Memotype]]''::<small>'''[[User talk:Memotype|T]]'''</small> 16:23, 20 January 2024 (UTC) |
|||
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) |
|||
:@[[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) |
|||
== New World Order == |
|||
::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. —''[[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. —''[[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) |
|||
⚫ | |||
What has caused the wording error in the first paragraph ? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— 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--> |
|||
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) |
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. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 12 months |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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?
[edit]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)
- @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)
- 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)
- @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)
- Good idea, thanks. —Memotype::T 17:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
- @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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Turns out that those parts were all original research anyways. Zanahary (talk) 03:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- Your recent changes to the lead seem to remove quite a few citations. DN (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. 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 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)
- Got it. What do you think of the newer revision? 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. DN (talk) 06:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
- Got it. What do you think of the newer revision? Zanahary (talk) 04:56, 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. Zanahary (talk) 03:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- Your recent changes to the lead seem to remove quite a few citations. DN (talk) 03:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- Turns out that those parts were all original research anyways. Zanahary (talk) 03:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
History
[edit]Explain what was the new world order after 1945 103.239.160.49 (talk) 08:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
Categories:
- C-Class Cold War articles
- Mid-importance Cold War articles
- Cold War task force articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class International relations articles
- Mid-importance International relations articles
- WikiProject International relations articles
- C-Class Globalization articles
- Mid-importance Globalization articles
- C-Class Soviet Union articles
- Mid-importance Soviet Union articles
- WikiProject Soviet Union articles
- C-Class United States articles
- Mid-importance United States articles
- C-Class United States articles of Mid-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- Old requests for peer review