Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Globalization

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:WikiProject Council | Proposals

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lizflash (talk | contribs) at 20:31, 25 May 2012 (→Project scope). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Wikipedia:WikiProject Globalization
Wikipedia:Globalization


This is a proposal to start a new WikiProject Globalization. Please add your suggestions and comments, below. Thank you.

Description

This project group would care for articles relating to globalization and similar concepts. The globalization article has been downgraded from "good." The Global Citizenship, World Citizenship, and Global Civics are separated for reasons that make sense to those with substantial knowledge but not for someone who is curious about the subject. And that's just what I've been looking at in the last half an hour. I think Wikipedia could benefit by having a group of editors who work on various aspects of globalization come together to create a systemic and cohesive presentation of the available materials on globalization. I hope you'll join me! LizFlash (talk) 16:16, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Important articles

Important articles (global environment)

.... for this proposed group – related to the global environment

Note: some of these redirect in ways that demonstrate the need for a WikiProject Globalization.

Important categories


... currently on the talk pages of those articles

Please invite these and any other similar groups to join the discussion about this proposal. See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory to find similar WikiProjects.
Group Outreach Effort Notes
Wikipedia:WikiProject Business (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Left message on Talk page
Wikipedia:WikiProject Geography (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Health (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:WikiProject History (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Law (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Left message on Talk page
Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Left message on Talk page
Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Left message on Talk page
Wikipedia:WikiProject Protected areas (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Sociology (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Left message on Talk page
Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Travel (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Left message on Talk page

Why start a new group?

... instead of joining one of these existing groups?

The challenge with filing globalization under any one of these Projects is that doing so creates a bias. Globalization is equally Politics, Economy, Sociology, Environment, Business, Health... and it's discussed by philosophers and travelers. An adequate treatment of this subject requires a space that can accept interdisciplinary points of view. I understand that the subject looks pretty light on articles, but there is probably someone else out there with a different point of view who can help expand this.

Project scope

This table is not an exhaustive list. It is meant to describe some places where we can help make Wikipedia's coverage of globalization better, and to identify places where input about globalization might be unnecessary, off-topic, or irrelevant. Please add to it.

Within project scope Not within scope
Articles about issues and processes that transcend nation-state or region A list of nation-states' responses to an issue that does not have global scope or impact
Articles about flows of materials, humans, goods, services, ideas and institutions across national borders
Geographical features that transcend national boundaries, are impacted by human behavior subject to more than one system of regulations, or provide value to human populations that exist outside of the regulatory zone of the geographical feature The mountain range behind your house
Political activity that transcends borders, the impact of policies of a nation-state or the words or actions of an government official on a global issue or process National or local elections, elected/government officials, or policies
Sections of articles about how changes in science, technology, communication and transportation have made the world smaller, or about how national policies about technology (or other) can impact beyond borders Articles about telecommunications equipment, technical aspects of technology, etc.
Sections of articles where the points-of-view of globalization schools-of-thought and fringe theorists should be clarified
Articles about the UN, the World Bank, G8, G20, IMF, NATO, and other global and international organizations
Articles about people, movements, and scholarly and artistic endeavors that are of interest because of their response to globalization, the globalized world, or a changing world Articles about people, movements, and scholarly endeavors that are of interest because of their response to changing national or local events
Articles with the globalize tag may fall into the scope of this project, but this project is not specifically about Countering Systemic Bias.

Sub-discussion on scope

Some different perspectives from what is currently shown (esp. on the 'not' side), above:

  • It's not always easy to distinguish between what's 'global' and what's not. E.g. I would think that global climate change was within the scope of a Globalization project, including, say, articles discussing national responses to global issue. It should be okay for an article on China's stance on climate change negotiations to be of interest to WikiProjects on China, Environment, and Globalization... Articles listing different countries stance on say the Kyoto protocol would be fit well, too, I would think. Why not?
  • Global institutions, organizations, and movements belong within the scope of a Globalization WikiProject, I would think. They play such a key role. The WTO, World Bank, GEF...
  • Technology is an interesting one. Think about the Internet... Certainly fits within a Globalization project. Or orbital satellites, a key part of communication, surveillance, and much more.

Anyway, plenty of food for thought. Thanks for getting this started! DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 19:52, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looking better... A couple of further questions:
  • Where would you put transnational geographic features relevant to globalization, such as climate/ global warming, ocean levels and temperature, glacial melt...?
  • What is 'CSB'?
Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 21:08, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your input! This part isn't going to be easy...

  • I don't disagree, when the issue has global consequences and a coherent effort has been taken by several nation-states, non-governmental organizations, and other stakeholders to deal with it. I can see where this could get trite if future members took it to mean they should make lists of national responses to every little thing. Articles like these should not give the sense that there is a global response to non-global issues. For example, I am looking at a cigarette butt on the ground right now. A list of responses, national and non-governmental, toward stemming the tide of cigarette butts on the ground could lead the casual reader to believe there was a concerted global effort in that direction.
  • I had excluded organizations because it seems like they are already under the care of other projects, but you're right that this doesn't make much sense, especially if articles on those topics are suffering because one school-of-thought or a fringe theory about globalization has used the article as a pulpit.
  • I was attempting to show that descriptions of the technical aspects of any technology is out of our scope, but considerations about their impact on global society should be something we watch. Take internet censorship - we may need to rely on our fellow editors to describe how the internet can be censored, but we should be able to improve sections about the implications of one national policy or another on the global discourse. LizFlash (talk) 19:45, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, you're right. I was thinking about the mountain range behind my house the first time. My wording is a bit awkward, can you help me a little?
  • CSB is Countering Systemic Bias - I added a link. The globalize tag is used to signal that an article needs more perspectives, or needs to exist in order to include perspectives that are not considered by the majority of Wikipedians. What we're trying to do here is different than adding global perspectives, although some of the articles we want to work on may need global perspectives. Do you agree? LizFlash (talk) 20:29, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support

Please specify whether or not you would join the project.

  1. LizFlash (talk) 16:16, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  2. DASonnenfeld (talk) 18:23, 24 May 2012 (UTC) – Yes, great idea![reply]
  3. Meclee (talk) 17:58, 24 May 2012 (UTC) - Yes, agree this area needs much work.[reply]

Discussion

I considered supporting, but I'd like to hear the supporter's response to to questions first:

  • globalization is a very blurry term; where will you draw the line and say "this is not part of the project scope"? I hope you won't try to tag articles on national economies, for example.
Thanks for your questions! Globalization is a blurry term and it's used as a catch all. This has made articles about globalization and related concepts on Wikipedia confusing and self-conscious. There are standards and definitions in the growing academic field, so there is no reason Wikipedia couldn't reflect that discussion in a way that would be meaningful to someone who is new to the information. LizFlash (talk) 00:04, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly agree with you that national economies are not within the scope of this project, but it's easy to see what isn't! What is in the scope of the project will probably be determined through an ongoing discussion by the group members, and will be determined by their interests and areas of expertise. For my part, I'm interested in clarifying the philosophy and it's history and defining key terms. I'm not really interested in what specific nation-states are up to, or even specific global issues, but I want to be here to help those who are if those areas overlap with what I'm interested in.
After lurking for several years, this is my first major Wikipedia effort. I'm being bold! And so, there is most certainly a risk in following my proposal. I've chosen this topic because globalization is a subject I care about and study academically. I am proposing to do this work in the format of a Project because another reason why these topics suffer is because many of them are essays written from a particular point-of-view or sub-discipline. If I start to jump in on every page and write about the things I learned in grad school, I'm just adding to the problem. Globalization is a new and evolving field, and a group of interested editors can work together to make sure that new ideas that pop up on Wikipedia follow appropriate guidelines. One more thought, if the group does become inactive after awhile, but it manages to make some significant improvements before it does, would that really be so bad?
I believe this really needs to happen. So why don't you jump on board and make sure that my inexperience isn't what causes it to fail? LizFlash (talk)
Global studies has a long tradition (see: Mercantilism, Global trade, Age of Exploration, Historical geography, Cartography). It has come into its own in the last couple of decades with pathbreaking work by Immanuel Wallerstein, Manuel Castells, John Urry, David Held, Ulrich Beck, Saskia Sassen and others. It shows no signs of going away, or of being simply a fad; nor do the related phenomena themselves... DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 05:20, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A good proposal, with an extensive list of articles and topics to encompass. Although I do have a couple of concerns over the definition of the scope, I'm a little unsure of other articles that this project may cover (and a new member to the project may be in the same boat) - perhaps to gain more support, you could write out the defined scope, that you would use for the project, here. In the same vein, what safeguards will be put in place to ensure that new articles are not created for topics with "Global" appended to the beginning of the title and then just goes on to compare/contrast different countries' attitudes? Also, would you ensure there is a project guideline on the way articles are written to ensure they conform to NPOV and that the project doesn't fall foul to either the pro- or anti- globalisation camps? But bearing these in mind I can see this being a useful project. Cheers, Zangar (talk) 11:37, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zangar, thanks! I will start a section to clarify the scope, and I hope other potential members and more experienced Wikipedians will contribute. Your example is exactly something that I would want to avoid. I'm not really clear on what additional "safeguards" I can provide. Do you have some additional suggestions?
"would you ensure there is a project guideline on the way articles are written to ensure they conform to NPOV"] - Yes! Lack of NPOV is a huge problem in this selection of articles, and as it currently stands the casual reader can't distinguish between schools of thought and fringe theories. I think it would be very valuable to have a sub-project-page that includes major points-of-view, schools of thought, and fringe theories, and from there we can guide Wikipedians to the proper way to clarify the position of a school of thought or a fringe theory in an article.
As to "and that the project doesn't fall foul to either the pro- or anti- globalisation camps? " - I want Wikipedia to reflect the current knowledge about globalization, global issues, and related concepts. Descriptions of the points-of-view of those camps will have their place in certain articles, but the articles themselves should not be about their beliefs. I don't know how to guarantee that one group or another won't vandalize the project or attempt to overwhelm our numbers, but I think we start by focusing on remaining neutral, and by gathering some experienced Wikipedians who share the goal. LizFlash (talk) 16:53, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that, as popularly used, the term is 'fuzzy', which isn't always a bad thing. But, that is why I've proposed a major re-structuring of the main Globalization article, which I will be working on in a sandbox. The article is identified as "top" importance by the Sociology Project, and will be helpful to my teaching, as globalization is a major topic in my courses that students often find confusing. As I work on this, I will identify (or locate) "main" articles that further explore differing aspects of globalization. These tasks should help clarify and further delimit the scope of the project. Thanks to all for the discussion. Meclee (talk) 17:05, 25 May 2012 (UTC) Also, to begin the project, I suggest further limiting it to improving or weeding-out articles already contained in Category:Globalization.Meclee (talk) 17:09, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for tackling the Globalization article! I like your suggestion to start by improving and weeding-out Category:Globalization. I think that's a great way to keep our work small and focused, it allows us identify and achieve a concrete goal, and it exposes us to people who might be interested in helping. LizFlash (talk) 17:47, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Globalization&oldid=494364798"