The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

> Help

This subforum is for critical evaluation of Wikipedia articles. However, to reduce topic-bloat, please make note of exceptionally poor stubs, lists, and other less attention-worthy material in the Miscellaneous Grab Bag thread. Also, please be aware that agents of the Wikimedia Foundation might use your evaluations to improve the articles in question.

Useful Links: Featured Article CandidatesFeatured Article ReviewArticles for DeletionDeletion Review

9 Pages V « < 6 7 8 9 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> World War II, The anti-US version
Selina
post Mon 20th February 2012, 2:42pm
Post #141


Cat herder
******

Group: Staffy
Posts: 1,513
Joined: Sun 19th Feb 2006, 10:28pm
Member No.: 1

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Emperor @ Mon 20th February 2012, 2:22pm) *

Well to read the "Occupation" section as it stands now you'd think it was a total picnic to be in an occupied country in western Europe. Nevermind a little organization called the Gestapo (try and find it anywhere in the article) or the fact that your countrymen might be Nazi collaborators and kill you or ship you off to a death camp.
I know this to be true because I've watched Allo Allo (T-H-L-K-D) only joking I did read a bit of stuff about the OSA before I remember

That is odd taht they would not even have a mention of the Gestapo >:| someone should fix that but I don't know enough about history to put the right bits in the right places, grr. seems pretty much then like how it is in China now, no idea who might be on the government's payroll, BBC reporters have said a few times people are scared to talk in public anywhere about the government even when they don't know they are journalists
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Emperor
post Mon 19th March 2012, 6:24pm
Post #142


Try spam today!
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,858
Joined: Sat 21st Jul 2007, 4:09pm
Member No.: 2,042



QUOTE(Wikipedia)
While European colonial powers attempted to retain some or all of their colonial empires, their losses of prestige and resources during the war rendered this unsuccessful, leading to decolonisation.[266][267]


Another example of poor writing quality, error, and biased writing. (note redundant use of "colonial")

First, decolonization was mutual in many cases, not a result of the Europeans lacking prestige or resources.

Second, "retaining some or all of their colonial empires" continues to this day. Britain, France, the Netherlands, all have little islands here and there, so in fact the statement in Wikipedia is false.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fusion
post Mon 19th March 2012, 9:20pm
Post #143


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 29th Nov 2011, 12:40pm
Member No.: 71,526



QUOTE(Emperor @ Mon 19th March 2012, 6:24pm) *

Second, "retaining some or all of their colonial empires" continues to this day. Britain, France, the Netherlands, all have little islands here and there, so in fact the statement in Wikipedia is false.

France has no colonies in any normal sense of the word. It has overseas territories that are an integral part of France and represented in the French parliament. If they are French colonies, Long Island is an American colony.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Eppur si muove
post Mon 19th March 2012, 11:41pm
Post #144


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 304
Joined: Fri 28th Nov 2008, 10:50pm
Member No.: 9,171



QUOTE(Fusion @ Mon 19th March 2012, 9:20pm) *

QUOTE(Emperor @ Mon 19th March 2012, 6:24pm) *

Second, "retaining some or all of their colonial empires" continues to this day. Britain, France, the Netherlands, all have little islands here and there, so in fact the statement in Wikipedia is false.

France has no colonies in any normal sense of the word. It has overseas territories that are an integral part of France and represented in the French parliament. If they are French colonies, Long Island is an American colony.

Algeria certainly regarded themselves as a colony but they were incorporated into France.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Emperor
post Tue 20th March 2012, 2:55am
Post #145


Try spam today!
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,858
Joined: Sat 21st Jul 2007, 4:09pm
Member No.: 2,042



QUOTE(Fusion @ Mon 19th March 2012, 5:20pm) *

QUOTE(Emperor @ Mon 19th March 2012, 6:24pm) *

Second, "retaining some or all of their colonial empires" continues to this day. Britain, France, the Netherlands, all have little islands here and there, so in fact the statement in Wikipedia is false.

France has no colonies in any normal sense of the word. It has overseas territories that are an integral part of France and represented in the French parliament. If they are French colonies, Long Island is an American colony.


Lousy analogy, but point taken. What do you think of the quote from the Wikipedia article? Do you think it is accurate to say that the Europeans were unable to retain some of their colonial empires?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mister Die
post Thu 22nd March 2012, 10:12pm
Post #146


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun 29th Jan 2012, 11:32pm
Member No.: 75,644

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Emperor @ Tue 20th March 2012, 2:55am) *

QUOTE(Fusion @ Mon 19th March 2012, 5:20pm) *

QUOTE(Emperor @ Mon 19th March 2012, 6:24pm) *

Second, "retaining some or all of their colonial empires" continues to this day. Britain, France, the Netherlands, all have little islands here and there, so in fact the statement in Wikipedia is false.

France has no colonies in any normal sense of the word. It has overseas territories that are an integral part of France and represented in the French parliament. If they are French colonies, Long Island is an American colony.


Lousy analogy, but point taken. What do you think of the quote from the Wikipedia article? Do you think it is accurate to say that the Europeans were unable to retain some of their colonial empires?
Generally when people think "colonial empire" they get images grander in scope than, say, Pitcairn or Mayotte.

WWII did see a rise in anti-colonial sentiment across the major colonies (French West Africa, Algeria, the Gold Coast, etc.) There was also an increase in urban phenomena like native trade unions and suchlike which contributed to this development. With the exception of small islands (and, say, French Guiana) the end of WWII was also the beginning of the end of colonial empires, in the sense of them being significant.

This post has been edited by Mister Die: Thu 22nd March 2012, 10:20pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fusion
post Fri 23rd March 2012, 12:37pm
Post #147


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 29th Nov 2011, 12:40pm
Member No.: 71,526



QUOTE(Eppur si muove @ Mon 19th March 2012, 11:41pm) *

Algeria certainly regarded themselves as a colony but they were incorporated into France.

nope.gif Hey, that's crap! Algeria is an indpendent country!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Emperor
post Fri 23rd March 2012, 2:23pm
Post #148


Try spam today!
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,858
Joined: Sat 21st Jul 2007, 4:09pm
Member No.: 2,042



QUOTE(Fusion @ Fri 23rd March 2012, 8:37am) *

QUOTE(Eppur si muove @ Mon 19th March 2012, 11:41pm) *

Algeria certainly regarded themselves as a colony but they were incorporated into France.

nope.gif Hey, that's crap! Algeria is an indpendent country!


I think the point was France tried the same legal tricks with Algeria but the Algerians weren't having it.

Basically making the debate here about some hyperliteral definition of "colony", in order to argue that the statement in Wikipedia is somehow technically correct.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fusion
post Sat 24th March 2012, 6:25pm
Post #149


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 29th Nov 2011, 12:40pm
Member No.: 71,526



QUOTE(Emperor @ Fri 23rd March 2012, 2:23pm) *

Basically making the debate here about some hyperliteral definition of "colony", in order to argue that the statement in Wikipedia is somehow technically correct.

Hyperliteral? There is such a big difference between living in a colony and in an area that is fully a part of some other country and is represented in its Parliament. I can tell you that. Try going to an American colony like Puerto Rico and compare that with Hawaii (if you don't like Long Island as an example).
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Emperor
post Sat 24th March 2012, 6:50pm
Post #150


Try spam today!
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,858
Joined: Sat 21st Jul 2007, 4:09pm
Member No.: 2,042



QUOTE(Fusion @ Sat 24th March 2012, 2:25pm) *

QUOTE(Emperor @ Fri 23rd March 2012, 2:23pm) *

Basically making the debate here about some hyperliteral definition of "colony", in order to argue that the statement in Wikipedia is somehow technically correct.

Hyperliteral? There is such a big difference between living in a colony and in an area that is fully a part of some other country and is represented in its Parliament. I can tell you that. Try going to an American colony like Puerto Rico and compare that with Hawaii (if you don't like Long Island as an example).


QUOTE(Wikipedia)
While European colonial powers attempted to retain some or all of their colonial empires, their losses of prestige and resources during the war rendered this unsuccessful, leading to decolonisation.[266][267]


Is your argument that this statement is 100% true and accurate?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fusion
post Sat 24th March 2012, 7:04pm
Post #151


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 29th Nov 2011, 12:40pm
Member No.: 71,526



QUOTE(Emperor @ Sat 24th March 2012, 6:50pm) *

QUOTE(Wikipedia)
While European colonial powers attempted to retain some or all of their colonial empires, their losses of prestige and resources during the war rendered this unsuccessful, leading to decolonisation.[266][267]


Is your argument that this statement is 100% true and accurate?

How could you deduce such from what I have said? However, the following is true:

* Britain (under Churchill) and Russia did their best to retain an empire; I have no doubt that France did too. Russia went so far as to use military force against Hungary and Czechoslovakia.
* All three of these countries lost huge resources during the War. I do not know how much prestige they lost. Russia at least gained; it became one of the two superpowers.
* There was large decolonisation. As I understand it, France has no colonies at all. Britain has only very few, and in at least two cases (Gibraltar and the Falklands) the colonial citizens want their status to continue. In Russia's case, many people in its ex-colonies would like to go back to being colonies. Admittedly, these are mostly Russians.
* America is of course not in Europe. It too lost some resources in the war, though much less than European countries, and certainly gained in prestige. Since then it has absorbed Alaska and Hawaii just as France absorbed some of its colonies. Other American colonies remain such.

Thus there is yes much truth in the statement but far from 100%.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Emperor
post Sat 24th March 2012, 11:29pm
Post #152


Try spam today!
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,858
Joined: Sat 21st Jul 2007, 4:09pm
Member No.: 2,042



QUOTE(Fusion @ Sat 24th March 2012, 3:04pm) *

QUOTE(Emperor @ Sat 24th March 2012, 6:50pm) *

QUOTE(Wikipedia)
While European colonial powers attempted to retain some or all of their colonial empires, their losses of prestige and resources during the war rendered this unsuccessful, leading to decolonisation.[266][267]


Is your argument that this statement is 100% true and accurate?

How could you deduce such from what I have said? However, the following is true:

* Britain (under Churchill) and Russia did their best to retain an empire; I have no doubt that France did too. Russia went so far as to use military force against Hungary and Czechoslovakia.
* All three of these countries lost huge resources during the War. I do not know how much prestige they lost. Russia at least gained; it became one of the two superpowers.
* There was large decolonisation. As I understand it, France has no colonies at all. Britain has only very few, and in at least two cases (Gibraltar and the Falklands) the colonial citizens want their status to continue. In Russia's case, many people in its ex-colonies would like to go back to being colonies. Admittedly, these are mostly Russians.
* America is of course not in Europe. It too lost some resources in the war, though much less than European countries, and certainly gained in prestige. Since then it has absorbed Alaska and Hawaii just as France absorbed some of its colonies. Other American colonies remain such.

Thus there is yes much truth in the statement but far from 100%.


My issues with the statement are:

1) "retain some" --> "unsuccessful"
Not true or there wouldn't be French in Guiana or British in the Falklands or Dutch in Aruba.

2) "losses of prestige and resources during the war rendered this unsuccessful"

It was much more complex than lack of prestige and resources. India, for example.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Sun 25th March 2012, 12:09am
Post #153


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Fusion @ Sat 24th March 2012, 7:04pm) *
America is of course not in Europe. It too lost some resources in the war, though much less than European countries


And we all know why that is don't we children. rolleyes.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Fusion
post Sun 25th March 2012, 2:11pm
Post #154


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 346
Joined: Tue 29th Nov 2011, 12:40pm
Member No.: 71,526



QUOTE(Emperor @ Sun 25th March 2012, 12:29am) *

My issues with the statement are:

1) "retain some" --> "unsuccessful"
Not true or there wouldn't be French in Guiana or British in the Falklands or Dutch in Aruba.

2) "losses of prestige and resources during the war rendered this unsuccessful"

It was much more complex than lack of prestige and resources. India, for example.

I am totally at a loss to know why you are arguing with me. Where do we disagree? You may disagree with what you thought I said. If so I do suggest that you acquaint yourself with what I actually did say.

QUOTE(Web Fred @ Sun 25th March 2012, 1:09am) *

QUOTE(Fusion @ Sat 24th March 2012, 7:04pm) *
America is of course not in Europe. It too lost some resources in the war, though much less than European countries


And we all know why that is don't we children. rolleyes.gif

Because neither the Germans nor the Japanese were in a position to do serious damage to the American mainland.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Sun 25th March 2012, 2:29pm
Post #155


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Fusion @ Sun 25th March 2012, 2:11pm) *


QUOTE(Web Fred @ Sun 25th March 2012, 1:09am) *

QUOTE(Fusion @ Sat 24th March 2012, 7:04pm) *
America is of course not in Europe. It too lost some resources in the war, though much less than European countries


And we all know why that is don't we children. rolleyes.gif

Because neither the Germans nor the Japanese were in a position to do serious damage to the American mainland.


That and the fact they were somewhat late to a party they only reluctantly attended.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Emperor
post Sun 25th March 2012, 6:41pm
Post #156


Try spam today!
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,858
Joined: Sat 21st Jul 2007, 4:09pm
Member No.: 2,042



QUOTE(Fusion @ Sun 25th March 2012, 10:11am) *

QUOTE(Emperor @ Sun 25th March 2012, 12:29am) *

My issues with the statement are:

1) "retain some" --> "unsuccessful"
Not true or there wouldn't be French in Guiana or British in the Falklands or Dutch in Aruba.

2) "losses of prestige and resources during the war rendered this unsuccessful"

It was much more complex than lack of prestige and resources. India, for example.

I am totally at a loss to know why you are arguing with me. Where do we disagree? You may disagree with what you thought I said. If so I do suggest that you acquaint yourself with what I actually did say.



I'm trying to criticize a specific statement in a Wikipedia article, to show that a top 20 article in Wikipedia can have errors and bias in it for years.

You seem to be trying to make some point about colonialism.

QUOTE(Web Fred @ Sun 25th March 2012, 10:29am) *

QUOTE(Fusion @ Sun 25th March 2012, 2:11pm) *


QUOTE(Web Fred @ Sun 25th March 2012, 1:09am) *

QUOTE(Fusion @ Sat 24th March 2012, 7:04pm) *
America is of course not in Europe. It too lost some resources in the war, though much less than European countries


And we all know why that is don't we children. rolleyes.gif

Because neither the Germans nor the Japanese were in a position to do serious damage to the American mainland.


That and the fact they were somewhat late to a party they only reluctantly attended.


In terms of men killed, the USA lost more than Britain or France in absolute numbers. Only resource that really matters.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Web Fred
post Sun 25th March 2012, 6:59pm
Post #157


Pervert & Swinger
*****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 739
Joined: Sat 13th Feb 2010, 3:25pm
From: Manchester, UK
Member No.: 17,141

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Emperor @ Sun 25th March 2012, 7:41pm) *

In terms of men killed, the USA lost more than Britain or France in absolute numbers. Only resource that really matters.


It wasn't our fault we were better soldiers.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Emperor
post Sun 25th March 2012, 7:09pm
Post #158


Try spam today!
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,858
Joined: Sat 21st Jul 2007, 4:09pm
Member No.: 2,042



QUOTE(Web Fred @ Sun 25th March 2012, 2:59pm) *

QUOTE(Emperor @ Sun 25th March 2012, 7:41pm) *

In terms of men killed, the USA lost more than Britain or France in absolute numbers. Only resource that really matters.


It wasn't our fault we were better soldiers.


I have nothing but the highest respect for the British during World War II. Now stop trolling.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Mister Die
post Mon 26th March 2012, 3:20am
Post #159


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 88
Joined: Sun 29th Jan 2012, 11:32pm
Member No.: 75,644

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I wonder what'd happen if a bunch of guys got together and basically made "Wikipedia's World War II Article: The Good Edition" and submitted it in one single edit, modifying the entire article from top to bottom. Like something so detailed (within acceptable encyclopedic limits), well-written, and informative that it clearly looks superior to anything that preceded it.

Probably "YOU DID NOT DISCUSS THIS" and it'd get reverted, but yeah.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Emperor
post Mon 26th March 2012, 4:10am
Post #160


Try spam today!
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,858
Joined: Sat 21st Jul 2007, 4:09pm
Member No.: 2,042



QUOTE(Mister Die @ Sun 25th March 2012, 11:20pm) *

I wonder what'd happen if a bunch of guys got together and basically made "Wikipedia's World War II Article: The Good Edition" and submitted it in one single edit, modifying the entire article from top to bottom. Like something so detailed (within acceptable encyclopedic limits), well-written, and informative that it clearly looks superior to anything that preceded it.

Probably "YOU DID NOT DISCUSS THIS" and it'd get reverted, but yeah.


yeah it would be World War III, but still a good idea. You could have a bunch of ten year olds write it. At least they'd know to put a picture of Hitler at the top, not Keitel.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

9 Pages V « < 6 7 8 9 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 18th 4 14, 4:45am