Open main menu

Contents

UntitledEdit


Here's one example from a section that needs some cleanup and a NPOV revision: "Free-market economy is incapable of meeting the population's needs on its own."

DJGWB (talk) 04:47, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Cut from intro:

... refers to a system-wide structure that both allows and constrains the behavior of actors in interdependent relationships in the absence of an overarching political authority. The global international system is the best example of this.

I wonder who's advocating the above. Anyway, it's harder to understand than the phraseology I lifted from further down in the article. Uncle Ed 19:04, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

I cut the references to "good governance" as the definition of "global governance" is value-neutral. It is descriptive, not normatively prescriptive. 155.212.123.19 19:24, 1 November 2007 (UTC)KZA

Added sources to support statement in the section on the view of the United States on global governance, except for one (still searching), and removed the neutrality tag. Vedah Eulalia (talk) 16:40, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

derpEdit

I've removed all the "innovative and significant" fluffery from the North America section, as it's POV. Jtrainor (talk) 10:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Proposals for a New World GovernanceEdit

The Committee to Frame a World Constitution took place at the University of Chicago from 1945-48. They published a Preliminary Draft of a World Constitution in 1948.

Delegates/Authors: Robert M. Hutchins, G. A. Borgese, Mortimer J. Adler, Stringfellow Barr, Albert Guérard, Harold A. Innis, Erich Kahler, Wilber G. Katz, Charles Howard McIlwain, Robert Redfield, Rexford G. Tugwell

MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 18:22, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Writing StyleEdit

I added two tags for argument-style writing. Perhaps I should have used the "promotional" tags instead. Whatever, the current format of the sections isn't appropriate for Wikipedia.

  • The first section reads like an "arguments in favor" fact sheet. The Q&A format of "Why do we want global governance?" "Here's why we want global governance!" is not encyclopedic.
  • In the other section, the five principles from the Charles Léopold Mayer Foundation should not be presented as facts in an encyclopedia article. The section might be deleted, or it could discuss the ideas in a neutral format. It's also in the first person.

MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 19:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

It's worth noting that the bulk of this long article was added in 2009 by a single account which only contributed here. Many of the sources still in use are poorly cited deadlinks to world-governance.org, and much of the text seems opinionated in tone. It may consequently be necessary, if painful, to drastically cut back on this material and rebuild based on the plethora of better sources available in the library and online. Candidly, groupuscule (talk) 02:04, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

"the political interaction of transnational actors ... when there is no power of enforcing compliance"Edit

This sounds like the absence of global governance. Fix the lead? MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 01:45, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, the idea behind global governance is that "governance" is not synonymous to "government". The proposition is that even without a central rule-enforcing institution, some sort of order may evolve and exist, and the mechanisms which provide are referred to as "governance". "Government" in that sense is just one of several possible ways of achieving "governance". Whether you buy that or not is a different issue, but that is precisely what the discipline of "global governance" is concerned with. SchnitteUK (talk) 11:29, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

criticism sectionEdit

A criticism section could be used not only to incorporate some nationalistic viewpoints on this topic, but could also be used in explaining why some spread New World Order (conspiracy theory)or are prone to believe. Any ideas on this section?Rolyatleahcim (formerly known as Zzzmidnight) (talk) 06:42, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

I was going to say the same thing. Lots of things, from the anti-globalization movement, NWO theories, to Marxist critiques of international law could be summarized in such a section. I don't personally have the knowledge expertise to write a good one myself. 64.85.243.248 (talk) 06:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. 218.164.48.150 (talk) 02:51, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

International Simultaneous Policy OrganisationEdit

An addition to the Proposals section made yesterday (21st September) concerning the above proposal was deleted, apparently on the grounds that it "doesn't seem to be notable". I'd be grateful if someone could clarify for me the criteria upon which Proposals are deemed notable or not. Many thanks John Bunzl — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbunzl (talkcontribs) 08:05, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

See WP:Notability for Wikipedia's notability guidelines. These generally apply to an article's topic rather than specific content within the article. I think the likelier reason Bobrayner deleted your content addition is because it lacked a reliable third party source (see WP:Verifiability) and was sourced only to the organization's website. Wikipedia is also supposed to refrain from giving undue weight to things, and should adhere to the weight they have in the reliable literature of a given subject. On a side note, it's possible that since the organization is your own, contributions to Wikipedia concerning your organization may be seen by other editors as a form of self-promotion thereof (see WP:NOTPROMOTION and WP:Conflict of interest). I hope these offer some arrows to point you in the right directions as you venture into Wikipedia, but I cannot speak to Bobrayner's motivation for the deletion, so I'll let him answer you on that. John Shandy`talk 15:53, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
John Shandy: You hit the nail on the head. Thanks.
I'm concerned that there's no evidence the movement is actually significant to the extent that it deserves mention in such a global article; the only source was the movement's own website; and it looked like John Bunzl was just here to promote it. That's not how things work around here. Wikipedia is not a tool for changing the world. First you make a change in the outside world, then we write about it here. bobrayner (talk) 18:14, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying and I note your points.

To avoid any suspicion of self-promotion, I would invite the editors to consider adding something about Simpol themselves, either in the Proposals section or, perhaps, in the Stakeholders’ Views (non-state stakeholders) section. One reason for doing so might be that Simpol appears to be unique in offering citizens the opportunity of using their votes in their respective national elections to drive politicians towards a form of global governance. A number of sitting Members of Parliament have confirmed their support in writing (see http://www.simpol.org/index.php?id=90 )

Reliable third-party sources for Simpol would include the following three peer-reviewed articles in The Journal of Integral Theory & Practice http://aqaljournal.integralinstitute.org/Public/ :-

Discovering an Integral Civic Consciousness in a Global Age: http://integral-life-home.s3.amazonaws.com/Bunzl-DiscoveringAnIntegralCivicConsciousnessInAGlobalAge.pdf Solving Climate Change: Achieving a Noospheric Agreement: http://integrallife.com/node/60881 Transcending 1st-tier Values in Achieving Binding Global Governance: JITP, Sept. 2012, Vol.7, Nr.3. pdf of journal available on request.

kind regards, John Bunzl. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnbunzl (talkcontribs) 11:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

New Images neededEdit

The map featured is outdated. North America is culturally different from Europe by most current accounts. This website provides a better map. http://itsallaboutculture.com/eleven-reasons-to-study-eleven-global-villages/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.203.39.13 (talk) 21:08, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

This one is good as well. http://i.imgur.com/WQ2IkqZ.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.203.39.13 (talk) 21:11, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

"World Government" SectionEdit

This section is without sensible content, and may have been written to mislead. First part:

"Global governance is not world government, and even less democratic globalization. In fact, global governance would not be necessary, were there a world government."

The first sentence is contentious and completely unsourced. The second sentence is a logically absurd attempt at defense (also unsourced): even if true (which would make sense), it does not support the preceding sentence at all. In fact, it supports the exact opposite point the writer wants to make: the reason B is not necessary if A exists is most likely because B and A are in some sense similar or identical.

Second part:

"Domestic governments have monopolies on the use of force—the power of enforcement. Global governance refers to the political interaction that is required to solve problems that affect more than one state or region when there is no power to enforce compliance. "

No, this directly and completely contradicts what we have already been told in the rather more sensible "Definition" section (and is, of course, not sourced either): "Governance however denotes formal political institutions that aim to coordinate and control independent social relations, and that have the ability to enforce, by force, their decisions."

Third part:

"Problems arise, and networks of actors are constructed to deal with them in the absence of an international analogue to a domestic government."

Aside from being vauge, unsourced, quite sinister, and possibly untrue (I suspect "networks of actors" are constructed well before problems arise, as far as possible) this sentence appears to be proposing the creation of international structures analogous to domestic governments. Its actual meaning is the opposite of its ostensible point, which always makes the intentions of a writer suspect. It could be re-written, entirely preserving meaning, "When no world government exists and problems arise, networks of actors are constructed to serve the same purpose."

"This system has been termed disaggregated sovereignty."

Says who? No sources, of course, and the link to "disaggregated sovereignty" leads to a Wikipedia page that has no sources itself, and not even a Talk page. Highly suspect.

Currently, this section's text is misleading, unclear, and is not up to standard. The section should be either:

a) deleted

b) be replaced from scratch with a coherent, sourced comparison of the similarities and differences of world government and world governance

or

c) be replaced with an exploration into why some people are concerned about world governance as a precursor to world government (which I am not qualified to write).

I only came to this article in order to clarify the differences between world governance and world government, in order to defend against conspiracy theorists (see various arguments about Maurice Strong) and if this is the best argument on offer, score one to the conspiracy theorists.

218.164.48.150 (talk) 03:38, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

Global Challenges Foundation Prize 2017Edit

Hello,
you might be interested in the Global Challenges Foundation Prize 2017 challenge which is opened until 30 September.
This note is not meant to promote the challenge but to inform reasonably relevant people who might be interested about the presence of this article and this challenge.

--WikIdeaCatalyzation (talk) 07:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modifiedEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Global governance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:13, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modifiedEdit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Global governance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:06, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)Edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 25 external links on Global governance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:22, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

WhyEdit

Last edit? Dr.VINAY (talk) 02:11, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Return to "Global governance" page.