Jump to content

Talk:Western world

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2a02:1388:82:4d9:bb6e:8be5:f446:6e2e (talk) at 16:23, 17 August 2021 (→‎Removal of second paragraph from lede: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Huntington???

Huntington's nomination for the National Academy of Sciences was rejected after he was accused of misusing mathematics and engaging in pseudo-science. Therefore his views should neither be given such prominence, nor used as the basis for a map.Leutha (talk) 11:37, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Leutha, even through Huntington's ideas are philosophical or pseudoscience he is influential. I think the main problem of the article is more that there is plenty of undue weight given to him. Its almost as if he is given the right here to define the issue here. He should be mentioned among a series of philosophers and thinkers who have provided their views on the Western world, for example Miguel de Unamuno. Dentren | Talk 15:16, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dentren, who settles matters such as these? You are certainly correct in that he should be mentioned but definitely is not the final word. There are other edits I have made with multiple sources that keep being undone on this and other articles pertaining to the same subject, and it seems that it’s just undone because certain users want to keep the article swayed a certain way. Isn’t this about what references say? What’s the purpose of them anyway! I have created another discussion on the Western culture talk page entitled “Latin American inclusion” about the fact that Latin America is part of the Western word. It seems only Anglophone countries are “commonly thought of as western”. Who cares? What do sources say? Please check it out, am I missing something? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by CMD007 (talkcontribs) 02:59, 14 April 2021 (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) 15:39, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Extended Protection

Why is this article an extended protection article? I am genuinely curious as to why that is the case. Thank you for your time.


FictiousLibrarian (talk). 17:49, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does this even exist?

I feel certain parts of this article go too far towards implying that the "western world" is an objectively real thing, which it's not. It is a highly subjective perception of the world that is arguably inherently flawed.

Removal of second paragraph from lede

At a glance, the second paragraph of the lede has strong consensus. What's the problem with it specifically? Has there been past disputes about it? --Hipal (talk) 15:53, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's lies Hipal. There's a reliable source being used, which states the exact opposite. 2A02:1388:82:4D9:41FD:6282:F575:83DE (talk) 07:21, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Specifically, Ancient Greece was more Republican (the first western democracy) while Ancient Rome more Imperialist (the first western Empire). It's not weird that there's been such a prolonged consensus, because the last years in Europe have seen a shift in political power in favour of Italy (EU central bank, and EU Parliament, two most powerful EU institutions presided by Italian personalities). Also the United States are regarded, because of their extension, alike Ancient Rome, yet distinctly Republican not Imperialist. The above explains this wrong consensus.
I don't know about past disputes on this exactly, but surely this article has been disputed a lot for years I know this. 2A02:1388:82:4D9:41FD:6282:F575:83DE (talk) 07:37, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for responding here.
What do the other sources say?
Is Kurth's 2004 article still relevant? --Hipal (talk) 15:57, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt there's other reliable sources that have a different perspective on how antiquity unrevealed. However, I just read that first source, and not even the whole of it. Could be added that even when I last studied history in school, I was always taught in ancient Greece there was some form of democracy, while that in ancient Rome such democracy was disregarded at some point in favour of a militaristic law-abiding Empire. 2A02:1388:82:4D9:BB6E:8BE5:F446:6E2E (talk) 16:23, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]