Talk:New Imperialism/veracruz and 127
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
New Imperialism Talk:New Imperialism
D0Servo: hello. this is 172 D0Servo: are you there vera cruz? kimuradet: aye kimuradet: it would seem we both feel we are a better editor than the other D0Servo: You're not really editing the work. You're deleting huge, vital sections. D0Servo: Your only goal seems to be shortening the article. kimuradet: that is a big part of my goal kimuradet: which is why im trying to figure out what vital section kimuradet: i have deleted D0Servo: There are other much longer articles. kimuradet: is immaterial kimuradet: condensation is very important kimuradet: especially kimuradet: and note this kimuradet: at the beginning of an article kimuradet: it should be damn-near grade school kimuradet: for instance your theories of imperialism kimuradet: is on its own page now kimuradet: where it belongs D0Servo: You are fair-minded, but a lot of people are just arbitrarily criticizing my contributions to spite me. kimuradet: i agree D0Servo: hold on one minute please kimuradet: and they will ban you if you aren't careful D0Servo: The theories are important. Theory is meant to illuminate the historical record. By giving lay readers an overview of the theory before the section on the historical record, we will be able to help them bring in perspective. kimuradet: the theories are very important kimuradet: but you had them kimuradet: above the history D0Servo: We also have as it is many different theories presented. kimuradet: a big reason its so clunky right now kimuradet: is because i didnt even know u had a history in there kimuradet: cuz it was at the end kimuradet: the theories should be very very briefly discussed on that page D0Servo: So far we have three sections: causes, theories, history kimuradet: right D0Servo: The version that I keep restoring clearly establishes that New Imperialism had its roots in the breakdown of Pax Britannica. That's why "Pax Britannica" is relegated to the background section. D0Servo: Please, give me a list of flaws. I'd be able to better edit this article. kimuradet: as the articles are very different there are obviously a lot of things i changed kimuradet: why not try rewriting my version to more clearly explain that new imperialism came of the pax britannica section kimuradet: just try it D0Servo: Your sections on the "African Power Vacuum" and the "Changes in Technology" are way-off. kimuradet: how so kimuradet: go ahead and edit my version kimuradet: im fine with that D0Servo: In my section pertaining to causes, no information can be removed. kimuradet: but get something different than what u had kimuradet: u know calculus? D0Servo: Why? kimuradet: yes no? kimuradet: information can be removed kimuradet: imagine it like kimuradet: you wrote your paper on a computer kimuradet: and i came along kimuradet: being a virus kimuradet: and ate parts of it kimuradet: instead of reverting-try to rewrite it anew D0Servo: Did you read the Causes section of the article that I keep restoring? kimuradet: causes are in there D0Servo: I've fixed it since the first time that you've read it. kimuradet: mention a specific cause kimuradet: everything u did last night kimuradet: is in my version kimuradet: except edited kimuradet: i went through your changes and picked them out kimuradet: some were quite good D0Servo: These causes are too interconnected. They have to be woven together somehow. kimuradet: its like kimuradet: u knitted a scarf kimuradet: and i didnt like the colors kimuradet: so i took it apart kimuradet: and gave u some new yarns kimuradet: or using the calculus example kimuradet: its like finding a limit kimuradet: u were .5 over kimuradet: now im .25 under kimuradet: so u do .125 over kimuradet: its your turn now-but you gotta take my ball D0Servo: Did you read the section that I keep restoring? kimuradet: there were two main sections that i can think of kimuradet: the first one kimuradet: talked about the cavalier victorian age kimuradet: and distinguished kimuradet: new imperialism D0Servo: read the article D0Servo: read the article kimuradet: from earlier imperialist eras kimuradet: i didnt like it kimuradet: and u kept adding it in kimuradet: the other one D0Servo: I reverted that paragraph. kimuradet: was the section kimuradet: which discussed the american revolution kimuradet: and mercantilism kimuradet: and adam smith D0Servo: You've only read a small portion kimuradet: ive read it all kimuradet: and i wasnt quite sure where u were going with all of that D0Servo: I fixed those sections according to your suggestions D0Servo: That's why I'm restoring the article kimuradet: so i took those two paragraphs out D0Servo: I do not mention spanish mercantilism though kimuradet: now the first one is kinda back in there kimuradet: first off kimuradet: let me explain straight off kimuradet: why your reverting is completely wrong kimuradet: http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=New_Imperialism&oldid=557517 kimuradet: click on there D0Servo: very funny kimuradet: hold on D0Servo: this article is worse than no article kimuradet: just chill kimuradet: here we go kimuradet: http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=New_Imperialism&oldid=557454 kimuradet: and... kimuradet: http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=New_Imperialism&diff=0&oldid=557454 D0Servo: read the version that i keep reverting D0Servo: hold on kimuradet: which is your differences kimuradet: no kimuradet: u click on kimuradet: http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=New_Imperialism&diff=0&oldid=557454 kimuradet: that compares the two D0Servo: i've seen that version D0Servo: i know the differences by heart kimuradet: now kimuradet: what is the first difference D0Servo: you don't realize that that i've changed much of mine according to your suggestions kimuradet: oh i do kimuradet: what is the first difference on kimuradet: http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=New_Imperialism&diff=0&oldid=557454 D0Servo: I have too many screens popping up. You're getting me too confused. kimuradet: i only want u to have 2 kimuradet: http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=New_Imperialism&diff=0&oldid=557454 kimuradet: http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=New_Imperialism&diff=0&oldid=557454 D0Servo: Could you please just go through the version that I have restored and tell me what flaws you see. kimuradet: and on the diff screen D0Servo: Then I will edit it myself. kimuradet: what is the first difference kimuradet: u spot kimuradet: between my version and your version D0Servo: just tell me your point kimuradet: u see it then? kimuradet: agree or disagree? kimuradet: was or is kimuradet: which word shall we use D0Servo: i see the differences D0Servo: what's your point? kimuradet: im not making a point kimuradet: im asking a question kimuradet: the first difference between our articles is kimuradet: '''New Imperialism''' was the expansionist foreign economic policy seen amongst the D0Servo: okay kimuradet: '''New Imperialism''' is the expansionist foreign economic policy seen amongst the more kimuradet: now D0Servo: i'll revise that kimuradet: hold on kimuradet: the next question kimuradet: do u think we should link state to nation-state kimuradet: or rather nation kimuradet: so that the reader can go to a more general discussion of what nationalism is D0Servo: you wrote that opening paragraph, not me kimuradet: so u agree kimuradet: now the second half of this paragraph kimuradet: is quite different kimuradet: between the two version kimuradet: the primary difference kimuradet: is my "Deletion of critical text" kimuradet: that is kimuradet: Ushering out the gradual, rational empire-building of the mid-Victorian era known as the age of Pax Britannica D0Servo: Why are you nitpicking? You removed the vast majority of the text in the article that I keep restoring. kimuradet: i have deleted that, yes? kimuradet: and you want that in your version, don't you? D0Servo: yes kimuradet: do u know where i want it kimuradet: i want it down under ==Pax Britannica== kimuradet: and not in the opening paragraph D0Servo: Lay readers will want to understand what makes this period of colonialism different from the preceding one. D0Servo: They will want to know early on kimuradet: thats not something to address at this point kimuradet: right now we are defining a term kimuradet: that term being "new Imperialism" D0Servo: yes kimuradet: Ushering out the gradual, rational empire-building of the mid-Victorian era known as the age of Pax Britannica, the late nineteenth century late-Victorian era was an one of "empire for empire's sake". kimuradet: does not belong in paragraph 1 kimuradet: half of that sentence does D0Servo: That distinction is necessary for the definition. kimuradet: and half of it does not kimuradet: why is it necessary to mentaion pax britannica? kimuradet: new imperialism exists all by itself D0Servo: NO! kimuradet: i do not define 1980s when i define 1990s D0Servo: New Imperialism is the outcome of the breakdown of Pax Britannica kimuradet: now that i like D0Servo: that's evident in my causes section kimuradet: i will be making a change to my version kimuradet: in a few seconds D0Servo: please, read my version in its entirety. kimuradet: i have kimuradet: thats how i edited it kimuradet: by reading it D0Servo: not the newest one D0Servo: i'm talking about the one i finished editing half an hour ago kimuradet: now that i have edited my version we will get a new differences screen kimuradet: so close yours kimuradet: do u play chess? kimuradet: and open kimuradet: http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=New_Imperialism&diff=0&oldid=557714 kimuradet: where your text is now on the left kimuradet: and mine is on the right D0Servo: This is futile unless you've read the last version that I've posted in its entirety. kimuradet: the notable change is kimuradet: '''New Imperialism''' was the expansionist foreign economic policy, resulting from the breakdown of [[Pax Britannica]], which was seen amongst the more powerful of the [[Europe]]an [[nation|nation-states]], kimuradet: with that change in there kimuradet: is it necessary to state kimuradet: Ushering out the gradual, rational empire-building of the mid-Victorian era known as the age of Pax Britannica, the late nineteenth century late-Victorian era was an one of "empire for empire's sake". kimuradet: u need a comma after era in your version D0Servo: fine D0Servo: i'll take not of that kimuradet: so now D0Servo: but that's no reason to remove 2/3 of the text in the entire article kimuradet: which opening paragraph do u prefer? kimuradet: u should play chess kimuradet: then u would understand what we are doing here kimuradet: which opening paragraph do u prefer? D0Servo: '''New Imperialism''' was the expansionist foreign economic policy seen amongst the more powerful of the [[Europe]]an states, between the [[Franco-Prussian War]] and [[World War I]]. During this period, Europe added almost [[1 E13 m²|23,000,000 km²]] (20% of [[Earth]]'s land area) to its collection of overseas colonial possessions, with the focus of expansion being the colonization of [[Africa]]. Ushering out the gradual, rational empire-building of the mid-Victorian era known as the age of Pax Britannica, the late nineteenth century late-Victorian era was an one of "empire for empire's sake". kimuradet: but kimuradet: yours doesnt mentioned the breakdown of Pax Britannica kimuradet: and the fact that new imperialism derived from said breakdown D0Servo: that's not important for now kimuradet: is very important in the opening definition of new imperialism D0Servo: there's an entire section devoted to that D0Servo: i have an entire section called the "breakdown of Pax Britannica" kimuradet: but why not say it in the first paragraph? kimuradet: get right out there in the open kimuradet: the first damn sentence kimuradet: the british empire failed kimuradet: and there was a new era of imperialism D0Servo: I don't care if it's said in the first paragraph or not. I just care that you removed something like 2/3 of my text arbitrarily. kimuradet: if u dont care kimuradet: why dont u accept my first paragraph kimuradet: then we can move on kimuradet: but we cant move on until we get this out of the way kimuradet: because its the first paragraph D0Servo: Edit the first paragraph however you want. I just don't want you to massacre the sections pertaining to Pax Britannica, the Breakdown of Pax Britannica, Theories of Imperialism, History of New Imperialism, and the subsequent sections on changes in colonial societies. kimuradet: ok then kimuradet: i win paragraph 1 kimuradet: paragraph 2 kimuradet: you would agree, naturally, kimuradet: that scholars are continuing to debate this subject kimuradet: so we will assume that small change should stay kimuradet: and we move on to kimuradet: we likewise agree kimuradet: that scholars debate the relationship between this period and world war I kimuradet: but in the middle u state kimuradet: dubbed “The New Imperialism” to distinguish it from earlier eras of overseas expansion, such as the mercantilism of the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries or the age of anti-mercantilist ‘free trade’ colonialism of the mid-nineteenth century and kimuradet: whereas i have used kimuradet: See also: [[mercantilism]] and [[free-trade colonialism]] D0Servo: Do you want to go through each paragraph like this? Please, don't torture me! Write of list of flaws in my new version (the one that you won't read!) and post it on my talk page. I'll go through it my self. kimuradet: my good sir! D0Servo: I put the See also section on the bottom kimuradet: we will never settle this unless we do go through this paragraph by paragraph kimuradet: ah! kimuradet: but kimuradet: in your version D0Servo: the see also section always goes on the bottom kimuradet: no kimuradet: in your version kimuradet: we HAVE to link kimuradet: those words kimuradet: mercantilism kimuradet: and free-trade colonialism kimuradet: we have to kimuradet: its a wiki kimuradet: the question i ask kimuradet: is can't we just have a short see also: D0Servo: i have to go kimuradet: we will continue later! D0Servo: i'll be back on in an hour or two kimuradet: ok D0Servo: please read my entire article kimuradet: indeed D0Servo: will you please not revert my new version for now? D0Servo: at least not make any huge changes? kimuradet: u must understand kimuradet: we have a history kimuradet: its all backed up kimuradet: i have to edit my own version kimuradet: and improve upon it kimuradet: so eventually you will give up on your own kimuradet: seeing that mine has been improved D0Servo: Why? D0Servo: I wrote this whole article. D0Servo: I started this article. kimuradet: yes kimuradet: and im finishing it D0Servo: It's finished kimuradet: u can feel free kimuradet: nope kimuradet: u can feel free kimuradet: to go to military history of the philippines kimuradet: and start editing there kimuradet: i will be very interested in what u think D0Servo: I'm not an expert on that field of history kimuradet: so become one kimuradet: i have a great deal of beginning info there kimuradet: as the point is to educate kimuradet: u can determine whether it accomplishes that D0Servo: I'm not a military historian kimuradet: if you are writing about imperialism kimuradet: you are kimuradet: its just a matter of whether you want to sit in a gilded stateroom kimuradet: or a trench command post kimuradet: now u have to go D0Servo: In many respects, New Imperialism is a matter of political economy kimuradet: i agree kimuradet: and economics is the cause of war kimuradet: but thats marxism kimuradet: a whole nother topic D0Servo: Will you please read my new version? kimuradet: yep D0Servo: Why can't you change the first two paragraphs without deleting huge portions of my work kimuradet: because when u come back kimuradet: we talk about paragraph 3 kimuradet: and maybe u convince me kimuradet: and paragraph 4 kimuradet: and 5 D0Servo: wait D0Servo: read my new version kimuradet: yep D0Servo: you haven't even looked at my new version D0Servo: read the whole section D0Servo: Causes of New Imperialism, the Breakdown of Bax Britannica kimuradet: yes kimuradet: goodbye kimuradet: cya later
