Jump to content

Talk:Developing country: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 3 discussion(s) to Talk:Developing country/Archive 1) (bot
Line 33: Line 33:


I agree, it's very misleading. I think the problem is that we're using the IMF definition of "developing", and for some obscure reason, they deem it necessary to class Poland as "developing" which throws it into the same category as impoverished nations such as Ethiopia and Zimbabwe. Laughable isn't it. Poland has a VERY high human development index with high incomes, high life expectancy, excellent infrastructure, excellent public services, and yet it's classed as a developing country by IMF like Botswana. Poland isn't far off the standards of living of Western Europe, and its economy is currently the 8th largest in the EU and growing. If that makes it developing then I don't know what else to say!
I agree, it's very misleading. I think the problem is that we're using the IMF definition of "developing", and for some obscure reason, they deem it necessary to class Poland as "developing" which throws it into the same category as impoverished nations such as Ethiopia and Zimbabwe. Laughable isn't it. Poland has a VERY high human development index with high incomes, high life expectancy, excellent infrastructure, excellent public services, and yet it's classed as a developing country by IMF like Botswana. Poland isn't far off the standards of living of Western Europe, and its economy is currently the 8th largest in the EU and growing. If that makes it developing then I don't know what else to say!

Poland is considered a developed country by the FTSE, and the Wikipedia entry for Poland itself. This needs to be changed, as it is misinformation. Also, the UN considered Poland as a developed country back in '''1996!''' Why is it considered as a developing country here in the first place? [[Special:Contributions/46.205.193.70|46.205.193.70]] ([[User talk:46.205.193.70|talk]]) 01:01, 4 December 2020 (UTC)


== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion ==
== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion ==

Revision as of 01:01, 4 December 2020

Template:Vital article

References

Poland is developing… And developed?

This article says Poland is developing, but "developed" is literally the 4th word in the article summary for Poland when you search "Poland wiki." The article makes it sound like Poland is a rich country, but this one says it is developing. Why? 5.173.130.112 (talk) 22:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it's very misleading. I think the problem is that we're using the IMF definition of "developing", and for some obscure reason, they deem it necessary to class Poland as "developing" which throws it into the same category as impoverished nations such as Ethiopia and Zimbabwe. Laughable isn't it. Poland has a VERY high human development index with high incomes, high life expectancy, excellent infrastructure, excellent public services, and yet it's classed as a developing country by IMF like Botswana. Poland isn't far off the standards of living of Western Europe, and its economy is currently the 8th largest in the EU and growing. If that makes it developing then I don't know what else to say!

Poland is considered a developed country by the FTSE, and the Wikipedia entry for Poland itself. This needs to be changed, as it is misinformation. Also, the UN considered Poland as a developed country back in 1996! Why is it considered as a developing country here in the first place? 46.205.193.70 (talk) 01:01, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:24, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to move content from Global South to here

I am wondering if we should move most or all of the content that is currently under "Common characteristics" in the article on Global South to here. This way, that article could focus on the term "Global South" and what it is used for. Those characteristics overlap with content at developing countries and I think it should be moved here.EMsmile (talk) 06:26, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've done this proposed work now. Any comments? EMsmile (talk) 04:16, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Climate Change

Hi there, I am new (to this page and to wikipedia editing) so apologies if I am not adhering to guidelines. Please do correct me! I think that in general, but in particular for this section we need to write about the leadership of developing countries in adapting and building resilience to climate change and that they are not just portrayed as victims. I have started to do this by adding a sentence or two on Bangladesh but there is much more that can be added. MduToit74 (talk) 13:17, 30 November 2020 (UTC)MduToit74[reply]