Template talk:World government

Things

Criticism

There're no cristicism articles listed on this template. -- 200.226.100.139 (talk) 06:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Add "Global Governance"?

Should there not be a link to "Global Governance" in this template? 217.41.240.15 (talk) 14:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

I am pretty sure you got the time to create a glossary for that. (Here: Special:PrefixIndex/Global --75.154.186.99 (talk) 03:01, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

I would like to start a discussion on the appropriateness of this template. As it stands now it makes no distinction between regional and international organisations, the concept of global governance, and conspiracy theories. It lumps together institutions such as the UN and the EU, fringe proposals such as the North American Union and the World Passport and articles of questionable relevance such as Proposals for new Australian states and Globalization (is an economic process really related to global and regional governance?) and all under the misleading title of "world government". Can we please find a more concise scope for this template and restrict it to that? It's a bit of a mess at the moment. --Onen hag oll (talk) 21:11, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Removed:

• Proposals for new Australian states - nothing to do with world government
• World Passport - nothing more than a joke and not of the same order as other topics

I think it could be a good template but at the moment it's like someone's just lumped together everything with the word "World" in the title. ninety:one 21:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

I've removed international courts and law because it's already covered by Template:International Criminal Law. International organizations have been split into a new Template:International organizations. Regional organizations have been split into a new Template:Regional organizations. This template is now left as only concerning theories and ideas regarding an actual world government. --Onen hag oll (talk) 20:12, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

This doesn't seem like such a great idea - I've used the template to get around between organizations, and since any instance of the original template has been replaced with this one, that's suddenly gotten much harder. I think it would have been best to have left the international (and probably regional) organizations on the template. I almost reverted it … but that would've been a bad idea, because some of the breakup was constructive, but I just think that it went a bit too far. Elium2 (talk) 13:10, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually … we could just replace the template where need be … but I would say that the United Nations and the European Union, for example, are bodies that are related enough to be grouped together in the same template … Or: we could have a "related templates" section at the bottom. Elium2 (talk) 13:15, 29 March 2011 (UTC) (again)

I did make the extra templates Template:International organizations and Template:Regional organizations from it but haven't put them on the articles yet. The idea of a world government needs to be separated from international organisations - the two are not really connected at all. --Onen hag oll (talk) 16:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I've added the templates to the articles. I see you did a few, thanks. --Onen hag oll (talk) 16:32, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure thing. Wasn't really too hard … Elium2 (talk) 17:04, 31 March 2011 (UTC)