Misplaced Pages

Talk:Superpower: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:51, 27 October 2020 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,305,200 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Superpower/Archive 12) (bot← Previous edit Revision as of 15:20, 20 December 2020 edit undoBfFwG6A8 (talk | contribs)1 edit →British Empire/China: new sectionTags: Mobile edit Mobile web editNext edit →
Line 89: Line 89:


How can i ative it ] (]) 09:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC) How can i ative it ] (]) 09:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

== British Empire/China ==

The table comparing the United States and the Soviet Union should be moved from the Cold War section and expanded to explain how the British Empire fulfilled the criteria of superpower status until the Suez Crisis and how China presently does. ] (]) 15:20, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:20, 20 December 2020

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Superpower article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconPower in international relations (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Power in international relations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Power in international relationsWikipedia:WikiProject Power in international relationsTemplate:WikiProject Power in international relationsPower in international relations
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconInternational relations High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPolitics Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconUnited States Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconUnited Kingdom Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconSoviet Union Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconRussia: History / Politics and law Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Misplaced Pages.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the history of Russia task force.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and law of Russia task force.

Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13


This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 7 sections are present.

American overseas military map graphic - Should be altered?

The graphic overstates the extend of American military hegemony. For instance, Brazil is colored - but there are only 27 military personnel stationed there, which is more of a diplomatic or training mission than a superpower projection.

I think the map should only highlight countries with at least 100, or 500, or 1000 stationed personnel.

I'm getting the numbers from this German media report which details personnel numbers across the world: https://kritisches-netzwerk.de/sites/default/files/us_department_of_defense_-_base_structure_report_fiscal_year_2015_baseline_-_as_of_30_sept_2014_-_a_summary_of_the_real_property_inventory_-_206_pages.pdf

I propose that Honduras, Brazil, Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Bulgaria, Greece, Philippines, and Australia should not be colored on the map due to low personnel sizes based on the figures in the aforementioned report.

Removal of "Superpowers of the past" section

The subject of the article is not the word "superpower", but the concept. The common usage, in the vast majority of cases as found in a books and web search, is the idea of the post-WWII superpowers, especially the U.S. and the U.S.S.R., as well as "emerging superpowers" such as China on the global stage. The fact that a few authors have used the word to refer to past empires (and often in "scare quotes" to indicate non-standard usage) can be mentioned, but it's not really significant to an understanding of the subject.

The "Superpowers of the past" section appears to be an indiscriminate, mostly-random subset of the List of ancient great powers and List of medieval great powers. The fact that a book once used the word "superpower" to describe some historical empire is not an important aspect of the subject. Most of the citations don't actually use the word "superpower", and half the entries are unsourced. A long list of examples of past great powers in this article is undue weight. It also has no clear criteria for inclusion, and entices people to just add their favorite article to it, amounting to original research.

I've added a concise paragraph to the end of the "Terminology and origin" section, that explains that the term is sometimes also used colloquially to refer to past great powers, and given two examples of works that have used the term in that way. It also links to the above two lists of great powers. I think this is sufficient coverage of it, and the "Superpowers of the past" section should be deleted. --IamNotU (talk) 22:16, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

The section has now been deleted. --IamNotU (talk) 19:33, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 27 November 2019

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved; yes, numbers are roughly equal, but references to what first comes to mind do not outweigh both criteria for primary topic. As an aside, I commend those doing the thankless work of fixing links. (non-admin closure) Red Slash 23:44, 4 December 2019 (UTC)


– Does not appear to be the obvious primary topic. By pageviews, the political page gets roughly 3x more than the ability, but since the ability also gets around 400 daily, it is not "much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term." One out of every 4 readers wants the comic term and not the political one. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 17:17, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

  • Ask an average person on the street what a "superpower" is, and more than likely they'll say something like "Spiderman's web shooting" and not "a geopolitical force".ZXCVBNM (TALK) 03:33, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Support per nom - No clear primary topic (especially since "almost everyone going to the ability page probably the political page too"). Move disambiguation page to basename.
I'm currently in the process of fixing dozens of links to the political concept that should be going to "Superpower (ability)". The sheer number of mistaken links is telling. Paintspot Infez (talk) 00:15, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
Comment - In the last half an hour, I found and fixed 21 accidental links that didn’t mean to link here.
Fixed 17 accidental links to "Superpower" that meant to link to "Superpower (ability)”: ...on Bolt (2008 film), Lion-Maru, Shadow Fighters, Piece of Wonder, Swamp Thing (1991 TV series), Eviless, List of Misfits characters, Captain India, Marshal Law (comics), Nova (Richard Rider), Alternative versions of Mary Jane Watson, Superhero League of Hoboken, Captain Confederacy, From the Notebooks of Dr. Brain, NEW-GEN, Gabriel (New-Gen), Sean and Chris, Thea (New-Gen), Wally West.
And 4 accidental links to "Superpower" that should have been to other topics with the name: ...on 1987 in professional wrestling (to a wrestling tag team The Super Powers), ...Batman Total Justice (to Super Powers Collection), ...Willy Dozan (to a film series without an article), ...Greg Theakston (to a comic book series without an article).
...Yikes. Like I said, the sheer number of mistaken links is telling. Paintspot Infez (talk) 01:15, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
With all those bad links it still doesn't get near as many pageviews. 216.8.129.252 (talk) 13:28, 28 November 2019 (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.

China

China is now more powerful than the United States. (86.140.123.49 (talk) 13:23, 11 August 2020 (UTC))

Colour of neutral nations on Cold War allies map

The colour of neutral nations on the map is a light blue, but the NATO nations/allies are also blue. This could suggest that the neutral nations could be NATO allies. I suggest that neutral nations be coloured white on the map, to show their independence fron either side. Penumbra01 (talk) 14:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

English

I want active superpower Dollababe (talk) 09:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

English

How can i ative it Dollababe (talk) 09:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

British Empire/China

The table comparing the United States and the Soviet Union should be moved from the Cold War section and expanded to explain how the British Empire fulfilled the criteria of superpower status until the Suez Crisis and how China presently does. BfFwG6A8 (talk) 15:20, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Categories: