This is an old revision of this page, as edited by A6MKi-43 (talk | contribs) at 22:23, 6 January 2021 (→United Kingdom: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 22:23, 6 January 2021 by A6MKi-43 (talk | contribs) (→United Kingdom: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)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. |
|
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 banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Archives |
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)
- Oppose. 3:1 is pretty overwhelming. 216.8.129.252 (talk) 20:34, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
- Support Since almost everyone going to the ability page probably goes to the political page too. The ratio is more like 2:1, which definitely mean it not the primary topic (in my opinion).– BrandonXLF (talk) 21:28, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
- 2:1 still seems pretty overwhelming. 216.8.129.252 (talk) 13:28, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- Support The comic term appears more frequently in daily life. Dimadick (talk) 21:50, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
- Whose daily life? Are we living in the Marvel Universe now? 216.8.129.252 (talk) 13:28, 28 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)
- Support move per nom. There is a most frequent topic, but there is no primary topic. O.N.R. 22:26, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
- Weak support per Paintspot, getting a 3rd is enough to preclude "much more than any other" which would probably be 10x. Crouch, Swale (talk) 06:50, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. Very clear primary topic in real world usage. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:19, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. There is a primary topic in terms of long-term significance, and the current page does indeed fulfill the page view requirement. Dekimasuよ! 16:31, 4 December 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)
United Kingdom
In the table explaining how the United States and the Soviet Union met the criteria of being superpowers during the Cold War, the United Kingdom should be added, as it was also a superpower until the aftermath of the Suez Crisis in 1956. A6MKi-43 (talk) 22:23, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Categories:- Misplaced Pages controversial topics
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class International relations articles
- High-importance International relations articles
- WikiProject International relations articles
- B-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- B-Class United States articles
- Mid-importance United States articles
- B-Class United States articles of Mid-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- B-Class United Kingdom articles
- Mid-importance United Kingdom articles
- WikiProject United Kingdom articles
- B-Class Soviet Union articles
- Mid-importance Soviet Union articles
- WikiProject Soviet Union articles
- B-Class Russia articles
- Mid-importance Russia articles
- Mid-importance B-Class Russia articles
- B-Class Russia (history) articles
- History of Russia task force articles
- B-Class Russia (politics and law) articles
- Politics and law of Russia task force articles
- WikiProject Russia articles