This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Proactionary principle is part of WikiProject Transhumanism, which aims to organize, expand, clean up, and guide Transhumanism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page for more details.
This article, together with articles on "extropy" and "extropianism", seems to be self-promoting. I have found no external references that would not be affiliated to Max More and Extropy Institute. A search on Google News for "Extropy Institute" gave no results. --Dan Polansky 10:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I find a total of 12,300 mentions on Google of the Proactionary Principle, the majority of which had nothing to do with Wikipedia. I have also located two hostile analyses of it, two neutral definitions of it, and one significant mention of it in a noteworthy news and opinion magazine, Reason. I have added these to the External Links, cleaned up the text to make it clear that it is a description of the proactionary principle, and removed the "primary sources" and "peacock" tags. Allens (talk) 04:10, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Not moved current title consistent with MOS CAPS Mike Cline (talk) 19:17, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
It's the style in which the phrase was coined and remains fairly authoritative from the Extropy institute with no other group having normalised it's caps. But kick to RM if you prefer Deku-shrub (talk) 22:37, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Oppose per WP:DOCTCAPS. Also, the fact that reliable sources disagree is a sign that this is an "unnecessary capitalization", which our MOS decries. Primergrey (talk) 17:08, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.