Talk:Global citizens movement

Untitled

This is a very weird article. I've been involved with global causes for a number of years, and never heard the topic of this article described as a proper noun (capitalized) or by abbreviations. The language, grammar and concepts used in this article is confusing and inaccurate. From my own experiences, the topic is discussed in ways used more often by those idealists who are outside any real spheres of influence. This may be presumptuous about the author's intent or experience, but nonetheless, this article needs a serious re-write to reflect Wikipedian standards and broadly shared view of the topic. Tfleming 00:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

---

<<This is a very weird article>>

How do you mean weird? The article seems to take the direction of my most important clients. Microsoft says it this way: "As a successful global corporation, we have a responsibility to use our resources and influence to make a positive impact on the world and its people. At Microsoft, our passion to do well is matched by our desire to do good. We believe the best way to achieve those parallel goals is to align our business and global citizenship strategies. To achieve that goal, we consulted with our employees, and with people in government and industry from many parts of the world, because we wanted to create a citizenship framework that would both reflect and enhance the other aspects of our business." So it would seem that the Global citizens movement consists at least of the following:

• Responsibility to use our resources . . .

• Making a positive impact on the world and its people . . .

• Desire to do good . . .

• Create a citizenship framework . . .

• Reflect and enhance the other aspects of our business . . .

The assertions in the article seem to be accurate on what is happening, though you may want to sprinkle in other citations to the published experts that you can find on Amazon.com by searching on global citizens movement. --Rednblu 21:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

• It's "weird" because it looks to be written to promote one person's view of global citizens movements, specifically Orion Kreigman's. His article is cited in several places, in contrast with others who are cited only where they seem to agree. There are far more (and far better) articles on global civil society/global citizens movements than are used here. The fact that the term was capitalized throughout and is described from a non-NPOV also suggests the original author was writing to promote his article rather than accurately describe the social phenomenon of a global citizens movement. I have tightened up some of the grammer (too much passive voice used, etc.) and attempted to broaden the scope of the article, but a great many others need to be invited to contribute for a more accurate article on this topic. Tfleming 17:17, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi all --- the link to Susan George on Global Justice is broken, it is the very first reference and it seems important to fix. I did a quick search at TNI, couldn't be sure which of Susan George references was appropriate, they say their links are all broken because of moving to a "new website". I am Henri Laurie of Cape Town, not a wikipedia registered user. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.158.152.209 (talk) 07:48, 30 October 2009 (UTC)