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.
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.
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)
Modern History/Modern Period - What's the Difference?
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)
Should the headings "United States egress" and "Transitions and Enlightenment negation" be just "United States" and "Transitions and Enlightenment"? Vandalism?188.8.131.52 (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.184.108.40.206 (talk) 21:03, 20 June 2013 (UTC)
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)