Talk:Modern history

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject History (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject European history (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject History of Science (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content 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/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Supplemental
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.
 
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is one of the supplemental core articles, which every encyclopedia should have.

Tesla fiction[edit]

Removed this because it was unreferenced and contained popular (fictional?) claims about Tesla including his "work formed the basis of modern alternating current electric power systems", ... "with which he helped usher in the Second Industrial Revolution". "War of Currents" was "a bitter rivalry between Tesla and Edison", and Tesla was "the victor in the "War of Currents"". Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 21:07, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

primary topic for "Modern"?[edit]

If someone wishes to argue this, please use Talk:Modern. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 18:18, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Modern History/Modern Period - What's the Difference?[edit]

There seems to be some redundancy in the subdivisions of the Modern History time period. The period between the Early Modern Period and Contemporary History (approx. 1750 to 1914) is often referred to here, and in many other articles, as the Modern period. But this is also what the overall era (approx. 1450 to present) is more or less referred to— the modern history. Obviously the fact that these two time periods are conflated makes the discussion about the post-medieval age confusing. For example, you may have noticed that clicking on "Modern Period" in the sidebar takes you to "Modern History."

It is necessary that someone find a respected and appropriate time period to cover (approx.) 1750 to 1914. I would like to put out the suggestion that Age of Revolution be used as the global categorization for this era. It connects most of the world with the trend of Industrial Revolutions (Europe, USA, Russia, Japan), and political revolutions (USA, France, Haiti, Latin America, China, etc). If anyone has a better suggestion or would simply like to put out their opinion on this matter, please do share. — InvaderCito (talk) 17:08, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Update: I have also found this article, Long nineteenth century. Once again, is this supposedly theoretical period well-known and respected enough to use as a fundamental article in the WikiProject History? It would fill the hole in "middle" Modern history. But it sounds like this time period might be set for an entirely different system of time periods (i.e. it is followed by the "short twentieth century"). Age of Revolution is probably too narrow for this time frame, so the Long nineteenth century is probably more well-suited. Once again, I would really like more opinions on this matter. Thank you. — InvaderCito (talk) 02:29, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Update: This discussion has now been moved to WikiProject History as per WP:MULTI. Move any discussion there. Thank you. — InvaderCito (talk) 17:27, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Egress and Negation?[edit]

Should the headings "United States egress" and "Transitions and Enlightenment negation" be just "United States" and "Transitions and Enlightenment"? Vandalism?68.98.129.253 (talk) 01:36, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Someone has removed "egress." The section currently entitled "Transitions and Enlightenment negation" would be better titled "Science and Philosopy," so I am going to make that change.68.98.129.253 (talk) 21:03, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Both are descriptive section headers. If you need help with the understanding of the terms, see dict:egress and dict:negation. --J. D. Redding 12:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

they are not descriptions used by RS and that makes it original research, which is not allowed. Rjensen (talk) 21:52, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Cited and see also'ed. Stop removing info, thanks.--J. D. Redding 19:09, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
BTW, Don't confuse the local phenomena of America's later Great Awakenings (3rd/4th) with the events on the world stage. --J. D. Redding 23:11, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
Such wording falls way outside WP:TONE per articles should avoid "argot, slang, colloquialisms, doublespeak, legalese, or jargon". Reworded per above. Ohioartdude2 (talk) 19:59, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Terminology and usage[edit]

This section needs reviewing. The "Pre-Modern" subsection and first paragraph of the "Modern" may be copiously referenced (albeit some of the references appear a bit odd), but they are not really about terminology. They come across as a grossly simplistic philosophy based on "Pre-modern = religion and myth, reason and innate knowledge" and "Modern = science, empirical method and new information". There are various ways we could tinker with this, but I'd restrict it to a simple definition of the term "modern" (as compared with e.g. "medieval" or "renaissance", etc.) and leave the philosophical stuff out. --Bermicourt (talk) 22:06, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Have a look at this version, may be better. Allot of the article was expanded by an editor known for OR and WP:REFBLOATing articles. Many other parts of this article have the same problem. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 23:14, 6 March 2014 (UTC)