Human history is currently a World history good article nominee. Nominated by Phlsph7 ( talk) at 11:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Note: co-nominated with Cerebellum Short description: none |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Human history article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
Human history was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-1 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is anyone here strongly attached to 3000 BCE as the start date for ancient history? Here are three sources that start at 3500 BCE: [1], [2], [3]. I'm honestly not sure what is so special about 3500 since the earliest cuneiform is from 3300. I'm guessing historians just picked 3500 because it is a nice round number. Thoughts? Cerebellum ( talk) 11:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
The overall river valley civilization period, from 3500 to about 800 or 600 BCE, can be broken down into much more precise statements about changes and continuities in particular societies such as Mesopotamia and Egypt, where internal periodization schemes are quite elaborate, but at the same time this level of detail may not be necessary.[4]
In this chapter we trace the rise of complex societies in Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Indus River Valley from approximately 3500 to 1500 BCE....Our starting point roughly coincides with the origins of writing, allowing us to observe aspects of human experience not revealed by archaeological evidence alone.[5] Cerebellum ( talk) 10:45, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Not done, clearly no consensus for this change. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 09:18, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
I noticed the feedback request, and since I am too late for peer review, here are some comments. First, of course - good job!
But... I fear this may suffer from some OR. For example, the sentence "However, not all scientific and technological advances in the second half of the 20th century required an initial military impetus" needs a citation, and while it of course won't be hard to find, first, this sentence is a essayish truism, and second, what follows is a list of technologies and I doubt that we can show that all of those techs were not influenced by military.
As someone who is also just literary teaching a course on globalization, I am happy to see proto-globalization linked early, but the concept of globalization itself is missing. Ending paragraph says that "The period was marked by growing economic globalization", which is true, but. First, this is true for some older periods too. Second, why mention economic globalization but not cultural or political ones? They form the trinity of classic subtypes of globalization. Moving on, the paragraph seems not neutral, as it seems criticial of globalization ("with consequent increased risk to interlinked economies"), ignoring the postive aspects.
The next sentence, "Beginning in the 2010s, many nations experienced democratic backsliding." is correct, but it immediately raises (for me) the question - why wasn't this mentioned earlier? Democratic backsliding occurred as early as the interbellum period. See Waves of democracy. A quick glance at democratic backsliding suggests the article suffers from major recentism problem, waves... covers this concept better. The lack of discussion of artificial intelligence in the last paragraph seems like another oversight (in fact, this tech is not mentioned anywhere in the article).
The concept (term) of decolonization is missing from the article, although there are almost 30 reference to colonialism (colonies, etc.).
Another quibble I'll have is with the sentnece "Germany, under Adolf Hitler, orchestrated the genocide of six million Jews in the Holocaust and murdered about as many non-Jews as Jews". The first part is correct, but the second is controversial. Although a RS is cited (Synder is a great scholar), see World War II casualties and Holocaust victims. Why don't we mention the total for WWII casualties? It might be better. And the Holocaust victims articles gives the 'Total' figure of 17 million, that's not "about as many". I know well that estimates of Holocaust victims are problematic and controversial, which is I'd strongly suggested avoding that quagmire by using the uncontroversial figure (range...) for WWII casualties rather than discussing non-Jewish Holocaust victims.
I hope I can provide more feedback, but I am a bit busy right now. Still, my semi-random glance and two paragraphs suggests this article still needs much more tweaking. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Women fought to expand their civil rights[485] and began to enjoy greater access to education and the workforce.For global inequality we have
At the same time, economic inequality increased both within individual countries and between rich and poor countries.For human rights/moral progress we have
In a remarkable instance of moral progress, most of the world abolished slavery in the 19th century.Does that cover all of the bases? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 11:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus! I've attempted to address all the concerns you raised. In your opinion, is the article still a long way off from GA quality? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 00:44, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Now for Post-classical history.
First thought: "The era is commonly dated from the 5th-century fall of the Western Roman Empire" - I wonder if Chinese or Japanese histories (for example, considering major non-Western developed cultures and historiographies) use the same periodization? From what I know, they do not for their own history, but I am not sure what they do for the world history. Overview of what is mentioned at ja:世界の歴史 or zh:世界歷史 would be quite interesting and likely valuable, although it is a task more for FA level then GA level. But it is something we should do one day, I think.
Second, zooming back to smaller issues: "along with the plagues of the 14th century" - what other plagues were significant outside Black Death? Can we link to some article? Second plague pandemic perhaps? Which makes me wonder why first and third have not been linked (Spanish flu is linked later, good). That's it for now, will resume review as soon as I have time for that. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
I took a light skim through the article and found only minor stuff to change after spot checking a few different elements. I would probably find more to tweak if I took a deeper look, but overall, it seems like it's been improved and isn't far off from GA standard. Kudos! The images seem decent — for this article, ones depicting events I think are generally more compelling than ones depicting buildings. Sdkb talk 06:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Before the advent of Islam in the 7th century, the Middle East was dominated by the Byzantine and Sasanian Empires, which frequently fought each other for control of several disputed regions...The birth of Islam created a new contender that quickly surpassed both of these empires.Let me know if you want more. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 13:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Re [6] – why is an impossible to read image of the entire human history helpful in the section called "Post-classical history (c. 500 CE – c. 1500 CE)"? Aza24 (talk) 19:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
The article says: "The term hominin denotes human ancestors that lived after the split with chimpanzees and bonobos." But if you hover over the linked article, it shows a picture of a man and a chimp, and in the article, the picture is captioned: "Two hominins: A human holding a chimpanzee". Seems contradictory. 78.54.145.98 ( talk) 11:42, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: Phlsph7 ( talk · contribs) 11:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 ( talk · contribs) 14:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
I'll take this—such an important article should be reviewed ASAP. I'll leave comments over the next week or two, if that's ok. This review will be used in the
WikiCup.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
14:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
@ AirshipJungleman29: Thanks for your suggestions so far. Just checking to see if you have more comments. Phlsph7 ( talk) 07:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
"Massive
Wikipedia:Systemic bias issues" from User:Bogazicili Discussion moved to
[10]
|
---|
Ottoman genocides and Holocaust is mentioned in the article but the following seems to be missing:
And that is just from a very quick glance at the article. Here's a specific example of the biased coverage:
Bogazicili ( talk) 14:12, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
|
ushering in the Islamic Golden Age, an era of learning, science, and invention during which philosophy, art, and literature flourished.[233][m] The knowledge and skills of ancient Greece and Persia were preserved in the post-classical era by Muslims,[235] who also added new and important innovations from outside, such as the manufacture of paper from China[236] and decimal positional numbering from India.[237]To me, this sounds like there were no original inventions, but they just mixed ancient Greece and Persia with other outside inventions. Can original discoveries mentioned such as those in Islamic_Golden_Age#Mathematics, Islamic_Golden_Age#Natural_sciences, or Islamic_Golden_Age#Engineering? Outside influences can also be mentioned, but I don't think the current space is justified, given Greece, Persia, or paper from China etc are also mentioned elsewhere. Bogazicili ( talk) 06:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
and the decimal positional numbering system from India.to Post-classical history (c. 500 – 1500 CE) - South Asia? There is nothing about science in that South Asia subsection. Above can be reworded as contribution of India that was adopted by Arabs and passed onto Europe. Cambridge World History Vol 4 pp 148–149:
India made a fundamental contribution to modern science in mathematics. Indian numerals could be....Bogazicili ( talk) 08:47, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
These technical innovations had far-reaching effects.[542] The world's population quadrupled...(I'll refer to this as the demography paragraph), can we add Demographic transition? I don't think there is anything at all about this in the article. Many countries today have Sub-replacement fertility. This is noted in The Cambridge World History Vol 7 Part 2 p. 68
The demographic transition, to low birth and child death rates alike, reflected a quiet revolution in key aspects of family life. In The Cambridge World History Vol 7 Part 1, there's an entire part called "Population and Disease" (Part 2) with "Features of the modern demographic transition" starting in page 196. Maybe we can also include discovery of modern Birth control Bogazicili ( talk) 05:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
The importance of public education had already begun to increase in the 18th and 19th centuriesto Long nineteenth century section, to one of the shorter paragraphs. Then this paragraph would just note the widespread education in 20th and 21st centuries. But it also makes sense to give overview of education, like you did. Bogazicili ( talk) 09:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
The importance of public education had already begun to increase in the 18th and 19th centuries[x] but it was not until the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st centuries that compulsory and free education was provided to most children worldwide.[558][y]into the "the demography paragraph" Bogazicili ( talk) 06:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Meanwhile, industrial pollution and environmental damage accelerated drastically.[488]from Long nineteenth century. Climate change and environmental degradation is already mentioned in Contemporary history (which I believe is the correct place) Bogazicili ( talk) 06:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
GPT4o came up with bits that might be useful for the lead:
Extended content
|
---|
The study of human history is often divided into different periods, including
prehistoric times, characterized by the
Stone Age, which saw the advent of tool-making and the emergence of
Homo sapiens. The
Neolithic Revolution marked a significant shift with the beginning of
agriculture and
sedentary communities, leading to the establishment of complex societies and
urbanization. As societies evolved, the
Bronze Age and
Iron Age introduced new technologies and materials that spurred advancements in
agriculture,
warfare, and
trade. The rise of early
civilizations, such as in
Mesopotamia,
Egypt, the
Indus Valley, and
China, marked the beginning of recorded history, with writing systems, centralized governments, and monumental architecture.
The classical period saw the flourishing of Greek and Roman civilizations, which laid the foundations for Western culture and influenced philosophy, art, science, and politics. The fall of the Roman Empire gave way to the Middle Ages in Europe, marked by feudalism, and significant cultural and economic changes. The Renaissance in the 14th century heralded a resurgence in art, science, and intellectual pursuit, leading to the Age of Discovery and colonialism, which connected distant parts of the world through exploration, trade, and conquest. The Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries brought unprecedented technological progress and industrialization, transforming societies and economies on a global scale. The 20th century was marked by rapid advancements in science and technology, as well as significant political and social upheavals, including two world wars, the fall of colonial empires, and the Cold War. The latter part of the century saw the advent of the information age, characterized by widespread use of computers and the internet, which continues to shape contemporary human history. The study of human history is interconnected, with historians and scholars incorporating diverse perspectives to understand the complexities of human experiences across different cultures and eras. Modern human history is marked by ongoing challenges such as climate change and social inequalities, which influence the trajectory of human societies. |
It probably needs the Renaissance in the lead? Tom B ( talk) 19:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Would it be deleterious to remove the redundant era designations in the year ranges in each heading? Remsense 诉 06:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Ancient history (c. 3000 BCE – c. 500 CE)would become, for example? – Joe ( talk) 08:16, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Ottoman genocides and Holocaust is mentioned in the article but the following seems to be missing:
And that is just from a very quick glance at the article. Here's a specific example of the biased coverage:
Several European powers colonized the Americas, largely displacing the native populations and conquering the advanced civilizations of the Aztecs and Inca.[447] Diseases introduced by Europeans devastated American societies, killing 60–90 million people by 1600 and reducing the population by 90–95%.[448]
The conquest of Latin America resulted in the deaths of tens of millions of individuals, primarily as a result of disease and forced relocation into more concentrated settlements, as well as through exterminatory attacks on those who resisted Iberian domination. Severe exploitation aggravated the process through overwork, nutritional deficits, and reduced resistance to illnesses generally. Paralleling this process were concerted efforts to destroy the religious and cultural fabric of native societies through the systematic destruction of sacred objects, the death of indigenous religious leaders, and the prohibition of native rites
European colonisation has stretched around the world for more than five centuries, disrupting or destroying millions of Indigenous people’s lives. Yet only in the last few decades have some colonial histories, especially those of settler colonies, begun to be understood as genocidal. This volume reflects that historiographical shift. Sixteen of the following chapters identify and document genocides committed by colonists and their leaders in Ireland, North America, Australia and Africa. However, this volume also includes two cases of mass violence perpetrated by members of Indigenous groups, in North America (Ned Blackhawk’s Chapter 10 on the Iroquois destruction of Wendake) and Africa (Michael Mahoney’s Chapter 14 on the Zulu Kingdom’s genocide of neighbouring groups). In addition, this volume also assesses cases that did not take place in a settler colonial context, such as Dean Pavlakis’ Chapter 24 on the Congo, as well as four cases on the Eurasian continent, in Korea, Central Asia, Russia and France.
I'm also adding a NPOV tag for now. Bogazicili ( talk) 16:47, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
The 20th century opened with Europe at an apex of wealth and power. Much of the world was under its direct colonial control or its indirect influence through heavily Europeanized nations like the United States and Japan.. Positives are mentioned, negatives are omitted such as Atrocities in the Congo Free State (with up to 13 million dead) Bogazicili ( talk) 17:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
European empires lost territories in Latin America, which won independence by the 1820s through military campaigns, but expanded elsewhere as their industrial economies gave them an advantage over the rest of the world....So an entire paragraph but any mention of genocides or atrocities committed by Europeans are omitted? I don't think there's an entire paragraph about Mongols. Bogazicili ( talk) 18:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
That said, and ever since the initial Eastern seaboard settler wars against the Tsenacommacahs and Pequots in the 1620s and early 1630s, systematic genocidal massacre was a core component of native destruction throughout three centuries of largely ‘Anglo’ expansion across continental North America. The culmination of this process from the mid-1860s to mid-1880s ... native Araucanian resistance by the Argentinian and Chilean military in the Southern Cone pampas, primarily in the agribusiness interest. In Australia, too, ‘Anglo’ attrition or outright liquidation of Aborigines from the time of ‘first contact’ in 1788 reached its zenith in Queensland in these same decades, as a dedicated Native Mounted Police strove to cleanse the territory of indigenous tribes in favour of further millions of cattle stock. Undoubtedly, in all these instances, Western racism and contempt for natives as ‘savages’ played a critical role in psychocultural justifications for genocide
However, the 1864 Russian genocidal eructation of the Circassians from the North Caucasus into Ottoman territory...
One irony of this situation is that the most egregious case of violent mass death in fin-de-siècle Africa – the drive to extract wild rubber by concession companies in the so-called Congo Free State...
while the tanzimat reforms in the Ottoman Empire did little to slow the Ottoman decline. I'll make a proposal about this after I go through a few more sources myself.
The British also colonized Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa with large numbers of British colonists emigrating to these colonies.So you just need to add something like "which led to genocide in Australia" into that sentence. Bogazicili ( talk) 19:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
European empires lost territories in Latin America, which won independence by the 1820s through military campaigns. You can just say something like "Latin American countries gained independence by the 1820s". Bogazicili ( talk) 19:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Makes sense, I suggest you make those changes unless someone objects. I personally have never heard of the Circassian genocide but it has a similar death toll to the Armenian genocide and both are mentioned in the Cambridge World History, so to be consistent I think we would either have to include both or omit both. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 19:56, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Tsarist and Habsburg Empires against the Ottoman Empire sent soldiers moving and Muslim peasant families fleeing. So I believe this is due too.
Actually I was too hasty, looks like the Australian case is more controversial. See Australian history wars#Genocide debate. I'm not sure if we should call it genocide or not. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 20:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Can we mention Soviet famine was specifically directed at certain populations in
Human_history#World_wars? The Cambridge World History Vol 7 Part 1 p. 425: ...cause or amplify famine was particularly directed at the Ukraine, North Caucasus, Volga region and Kazakhstan
?
Holodomor can be linked to Ukraine.
Bogazicili (
talk)
09:26, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose to the Ottoman contraction article for being WP:UNDUE. One would also have to write about the Ottoman atrocities committed beforehand such as the Hamidian massacres and Bulgarian Horrors, it is POV pushing to omit these. And at this point the subject would be too long for a due weight in all of human history. KhndzorUtogh ( talk) 21:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose the bloating of the article with details on the Colonial genocides. It caused eurocentric bias. Colonialism is "intrinsically genocidal" and so is the human history. Non-Europeans were not inferior in the task.
Above, it was suggested to reduce the topic of genocides to an overview similar to the genocide statement by the UN, and counter-argued that there is no place for such an overview in the article.
Perhaps, the article can end with a Summary where such statement is made. Arnold Toynbee mentions several professional historians who summarized the human history: "History is one damn thing after another." Edward Gibbon summed history up as "a little more than human criminal record." And he died before most of the genocides mentioned here.
Summary of human history can be premature, as history will not end soon and Wikipedia is not crystalball. But Summary can end open with two possibilities, one realistic and one fantastic.
This article has a lot (~70) of refs to books hosted at the Internet Archive, most of which are now unavailable due to a recent court ruling. How should we handle this? Remove the links to IA or leave them in place while the case is on appeal? Cerebellum ( talk) 11:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Human history is currently a World history good article nominee. Nominated by Phlsph7 ( talk) at 11:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Note: co-nominated with Cerebellum Short description: none |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Human history article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
Human history was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This
level-1 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Other talk page banners | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is anyone here strongly attached to 3000 BCE as the start date for ancient history? Here are three sources that start at 3500 BCE: [1], [2], [3]. I'm honestly not sure what is so special about 3500 since the earliest cuneiform is from 3300. I'm guessing historians just picked 3500 because it is a nice round number. Thoughts? Cerebellum ( talk) 11:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
The overall river valley civilization period, from 3500 to about 800 or 600 BCE, can be broken down into much more precise statements about changes and continuities in particular societies such as Mesopotamia and Egypt, where internal periodization schemes are quite elaborate, but at the same time this level of detail may not be necessary.[4]
In this chapter we trace the rise of complex societies in Mesopotamia, Egypt, and the Indus River Valley from approximately 3500 to 1500 BCE....Our starting point roughly coincides with the origins of writing, allowing us to observe aspects of human experience not revealed by archaeological evidence alone.[5] Cerebellum ( talk) 10:45, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
Not done, clearly no consensus for this change. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 09:18, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
I noticed the feedback request, and since I am too late for peer review, here are some comments. First, of course - good job!
But... I fear this may suffer from some OR. For example, the sentence "However, not all scientific and technological advances in the second half of the 20th century required an initial military impetus" needs a citation, and while it of course won't be hard to find, first, this sentence is a essayish truism, and second, what follows is a list of technologies and I doubt that we can show that all of those techs were not influenced by military.
As someone who is also just literary teaching a course on globalization, I am happy to see proto-globalization linked early, but the concept of globalization itself is missing. Ending paragraph says that "The period was marked by growing economic globalization", which is true, but. First, this is true for some older periods too. Second, why mention economic globalization but not cultural or political ones? They form the trinity of classic subtypes of globalization. Moving on, the paragraph seems not neutral, as it seems criticial of globalization ("with consequent increased risk to interlinked economies"), ignoring the postive aspects.
The next sentence, "Beginning in the 2010s, many nations experienced democratic backsliding." is correct, but it immediately raises (for me) the question - why wasn't this mentioned earlier? Democratic backsliding occurred as early as the interbellum period. See Waves of democracy. A quick glance at democratic backsliding suggests the article suffers from major recentism problem, waves... covers this concept better. The lack of discussion of artificial intelligence in the last paragraph seems like another oversight (in fact, this tech is not mentioned anywhere in the article).
The concept (term) of decolonization is missing from the article, although there are almost 30 reference to colonialism (colonies, etc.).
Another quibble I'll have is with the sentnece "Germany, under Adolf Hitler, orchestrated the genocide of six million Jews in the Holocaust and murdered about as many non-Jews as Jews". The first part is correct, but the second is controversial. Although a RS is cited (Synder is a great scholar), see World War II casualties and Holocaust victims. Why don't we mention the total for WWII casualties? It might be better. And the Holocaust victims articles gives the 'Total' figure of 17 million, that's not "about as many". I know well that estimates of Holocaust victims are problematic and controversial, which is I'd strongly suggested avoding that quagmire by using the uncontroversial figure (range...) for WWII casualties rather than discussing non-Jewish Holocaust victims.
I hope I can provide more feedback, but I am a bit busy right now. Still, my semi-random glance and two paragraphs suggests this article still needs much more tweaking. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Women fought to expand their civil rights[485] and began to enjoy greater access to education and the workforce.For global inequality we have
At the same time, economic inequality increased both within individual countries and between rich and poor countries.For human rights/moral progress we have
In a remarkable instance of moral progress, most of the world abolished slavery in the 19th century.Does that cover all of the bases? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 11:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Hello Piotrus! I've attempted to address all the concerns you raised. In your opinion, is the article still a long way off from GA quality? -- Cerebellum ( talk) 00:44, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Now for Post-classical history.
First thought: "The era is commonly dated from the 5th-century fall of the Western Roman Empire" - I wonder if Chinese or Japanese histories (for example, considering major non-Western developed cultures and historiographies) use the same periodization? From what I know, they do not for their own history, but I am not sure what they do for the world history. Overview of what is mentioned at ja:世界の歴史 or zh:世界歷史 would be quite interesting and likely valuable, although it is a task more for FA level then GA level. But it is something we should do one day, I think.
Second, zooming back to smaller issues: "along with the plagues of the 14th century" - what other plagues were significant outside Black Death? Can we link to some article? Second plague pandemic perhaps? Which makes me wonder why first and third have not been linked (Spanish flu is linked later, good). That's it for now, will resume review as soon as I have time for that. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
I took a light skim through the article and found only minor stuff to change after spot checking a few different elements. I would probably find more to tweak if I took a deeper look, but overall, it seems like it's been improved and isn't far off from GA standard. Kudos! The images seem decent — for this article, ones depicting events I think are generally more compelling than ones depicting buildings. Sdkb talk 06:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Before the advent of Islam in the 7th century, the Middle East was dominated by the Byzantine and Sasanian Empires, which frequently fought each other for control of several disputed regions...The birth of Islam created a new contender that quickly surpassed both of these empires.Let me know if you want more. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 13:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Re [6] – why is an impossible to read image of the entire human history helpful in the section called "Post-classical history (c. 500 CE – c. 1500 CE)"? Aza24 (talk) 19:37, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
The article says: "The term hominin denotes human ancestors that lived after the split with chimpanzees and bonobos." But if you hover over the linked article, it shows a picture of a man and a chimp, and in the article, the picture is captioned: "Two hominins: A human holding a chimpanzee". Seems contradictory. 78.54.145.98 ( talk) 11:42, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: Phlsph7 ( talk · contribs) 11:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 ( talk · contribs) 14:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
I'll take this—such an important article should be reviewed ASAP. I'll leave comments over the next week or two, if that's ok. This review will be used in the
WikiCup.
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
14:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
@ AirshipJungleman29: Thanks for your suggestions so far. Just checking to see if you have more comments. Phlsph7 ( talk) 07:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
"Massive
Wikipedia:Systemic bias issues" from User:Bogazicili Discussion moved to
[10]
|
---|
Ottoman genocides and Holocaust is mentioned in the article but the following seems to be missing:
And that is just from a very quick glance at the article. Here's a specific example of the biased coverage:
Bogazicili ( talk) 14:12, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
|
ushering in the Islamic Golden Age, an era of learning, science, and invention during which philosophy, art, and literature flourished.[233][m] The knowledge and skills of ancient Greece and Persia were preserved in the post-classical era by Muslims,[235] who also added new and important innovations from outside, such as the manufacture of paper from China[236] and decimal positional numbering from India.[237]To me, this sounds like there were no original inventions, but they just mixed ancient Greece and Persia with other outside inventions. Can original discoveries mentioned such as those in Islamic_Golden_Age#Mathematics, Islamic_Golden_Age#Natural_sciences, or Islamic_Golden_Age#Engineering? Outside influences can also be mentioned, but I don't think the current space is justified, given Greece, Persia, or paper from China etc are also mentioned elsewhere. Bogazicili ( talk) 06:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
and the decimal positional numbering system from India.to Post-classical history (c. 500 – 1500 CE) - South Asia? There is nothing about science in that South Asia subsection. Above can be reworded as contribution of India that was adopted by Arabs and passed onto Europe. Cambridge World History Vol 4 pp 148–149:
India made a fundamental contribution to modern science in mathematics. Indian numerals could be....Bogazicili ( talk) 08:47, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
These technical innovations had far-reaching effects.[542] The world's population quadrupled...(I'll refer to this as the demography paragraph), can we add Demographic transition? I don't think there is anything at all about this in the article. Many countries today have Sub-replacement fertility. This is noted in The Cambridge World History Vol 7 Part 2 p. 68
The demographic transition, to low birth and child death rates alike, reflected a quiet revolution in key aspects of family life. In The Cambridge World History Vol 7 Part 1, there's an entire part called "Population and Disease" (Part 2) with "Features of the modern demographic transition" starting in page 196. Maybe we can also include discovery of modern Birth control Bogazicili ( talk) 05:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
The importance of public education had already begun to increase in the 18th and 19th centuriesto Long nineteenth century section, to one of the shorter paragraphs. Then this paragraph would just note the widespread education in 20th and 21st centuries. But it also makes sense to give overview of education, like you did. Bogazicili ( talk) 09:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
The importance of public education had already begun to increase in the 18th and 19th centuries[x] but it was not until the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 21st centuries that compulsory and free education was provided to most children worldwide.[558][y]into the "the demography paragraph" Bogazicili ( talk) 06:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Meanwhile, industrial pollution and environmental damage accelerated drastically.[488]from Long nineteenth century. Climate change and environmental degradation is already mentioned in Contemporary history (which I believe is the correct place) Bogazicili ( talk) 06:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
GPT4o came up with bits that might be useful for the lead:
Extended content
|
---|
The study of human history is often divided into different periods, including
prehistoric times, characterized by the
Stone Age, which saw the advent of tool-making and the emergence of
Homo sapiens. The
Neolithic Revolution marked a significant shift with the beginning of
agriculture and
sedentary communities, leading to the establishment of complex societies and
urbanization. As societies evolved, the
Bronze Age and
Iron Age introduced new technologies and materials that spurred advancements in
agriculture,
warfare, and
trade. The rise of early
civilizations, such as in
Mesopotamia,
Egypt, the
Indus Valley, and
China, marked the beginning of recorded history, with writing systems, centralized governments, and monumental architecture.
The classical period saw the flourishing of Greek and Roman civilizations, which laid the foundations for Western culture and influenced philosophy, art, science, and politics. The fall of the Roman Empire gave way to the Middle Ages in Europe, marked by feudalism, and significant cultural and economic changes. The Renaissance in the 14th century heralded a resurgence in art, science, and intellectual pursuit, leading to the Age of Discovery and colonialism, which connected distant parts of the world through exploration, trade, and conquest. The Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries brought unprecedented technological progress and industrialization, transforming societies and economies on a global scale. The 20th century was marked by rapid advancements in science and technology, as well as significant political and social upheavals, including two world wars, the fall of colonial empires, and the Cold War. The latter part of the century saw the advent of the information age, characterized by widespread use of computers and the internet, which continues to shape contemporary human history. The study of human history is interconnected, with historians and scholars incorporating diverse perspectives to understand the complexities of human experiences across different cultures and eras. Modern human history is marked by ongoing challenges such as climate change and social inequalities, which influence the trajectory of human societies. |
It probably needs the Renaissance in the lead? Tom B ( talk) 19:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Would it be deleterious to remove the redundant era designations in the year ranges in each heading? Remsense 诉 06:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Ancient history (c. 3000 BCE – c. 500 CE)would become, for example? – Joe ( talk) 08:16, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Ottoman genocides and Holocaust is mentioned in the article but the following seems to be missing:
And that is just from a very quick glance at the article. Here's a specific example of the biased coverage:
Several European powers colonized the Americas, largely displacing the native populations and conquering the advanced civilizations of the Aztecs and Inca.[447] Diseases introduced by Europeans devastated American societies, killing 60–90 million people by 1600 and reducing the population by 90–95%.[448]
The conquest of Latin America resulted in the deaths of tens of millions of individuals, primarily as a result of disease and forced relocation into more concentrated settlements, as well as through exterminatory attacks on those who resisted Iberian domination. Severe exploitation aggravated the process through overwork, nutritional deficits, and reduced resistance to illnesses generally. Paralleling this process were concerted efforts to destroy the religious and cultural fabric of native societies through the systematic destruction of sacred objects, the death of indigenous religious leaders, and the prohibition of native rites
European colonisation has stretched around the world for more than five centuries, disrupting or destroying millions of Indigenous people’s lives. Yet only in the last few decades have some colonial histories, especially those of settler colonies, begun to be understood as genocidal. This volume reflects that historiographical shift. Sixteen of the following chapters identify and document genocides committed by colonists and their leaders in Ireland, North America, Australia and Africa. However, this volume also includes two cases of mass violence perpetrated by members of Indigenous groups, in North America (Ned Blackhawk’s Chapter 10 on the Iroquois destruction of Wendake) and Africa (Michael Mahoney’s Chapter 14 on the Zulu Kingdom’s genocide of neighbouring groups). In addition, this volume also assesses cases that did not take place in a settler colonial context, such as Dean Pavlakis’ Chapter 24 on the Congo, as well as four cases on the Eurasian continent, in Korea, Central Asia, Russia and France.
I'm also adding a NPOV tag for now. Bogazicili ( talk) 16:47, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
The 20th century opened with Europe at an apex of wealth and power. Much of the world was under its direct colonial control or its indirect influence through heavily Europeanized nations like the United States and Japan.. Positives are mentioned, negatives are omitted such as Atrocities in the Congo Free State (with up to 13 million dead) Bogazicili ( talk) 17:14, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
European empires lost territories in Latin America, which won independence by the 1820s through military campaigns, but expanded elsewhere as their industrial economies gave them an advantage over the rest of the world....So an entire paragraph but any mention of genocides or atrocities committed by Europeans are omitted? I don't think there's an entire paragraph about Mongols. Bogazicili ( talk) 18:03, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
That said, and ever since the initial Eastern seaboard settler wars against the Tsenacommacahs and Pequots in the 1620s and early 1630s, systematic genocidal massacre was a core component of native destruction throughout three centuries of largely ‘Anglo’ expansion across continental North America. The culmination of this process from the mid-1860s to mid-1880s ... native Araucanian resistance by the Argentinian and Chilean military in the Southern Cone pampas, primarily in the agribusiness interest. In Australia, too, ‘Anglo’ attrition or outright liquidation of Aborigines from the time of ‘first contact’ in 1788 reached its zenith in Queensland in these same decades, as a dedicated Native Mounted Police strove to cleanse the territory of indigenous tribes in favour of further millions of cattle stock. Undoubtedly, in all these instances, Western racism and contempt for natives as ‘savages’ played a critical role in psychocultural justifications for genocide
However, the 1864 Russian genocidal eructation of the Circassians from the North Caucasus into Ottoman territory...
One irony of this situation is that the most egregious case of violent mass death in fin-de-siècle Africa – the drive to extract wild rubber by concession companies in the so-called Congo Free State...
while the tanzimat reforms in the Ottoman Empire did little to slow the Ottoman decline. I'll make a proposal about this after I go through a few more sources myself.
The British also colonized Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa with large numbers of British colonists emigrating to these colonies.So you just need to add something like "which led to genocide in Australia" into that sentence. Bogazicili ( talk) 19:02, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
European empires lost territories in Latin America, which won independence by the 1820s through military campaigns. You can just say something like "Latin American countries gained independence by the 1820s". Bogazicili ( talk) 19:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Makes sense, I suggest you make those changes unless someone objects. I personally have never heard of the Circassian genocide but it has a similar death toll to the Armenian genocide and both are mentioned in the Cambridge World History, so to be consistent I think we would either have to include both or omit both. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 19:56, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Tsarist and Habsburg Empires against the Ottoman Empire sent soldiers moving and Muslim peasant families fleeing. So I believe this is due too.
Actually I was too hasty, looks like the Australian case is more controversial. See Australian history wars#Genocide debate. I'm not sure if we should call it genocide or not. -- Cerebellum ( talk) 20:03, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
Can we mention Soviet famine was specifically directed at certain populations in
Human_history#World_wars? The Cambridge World History Vol 7 Part 1 p. 425: ...cause or amplify famine was particularly directed at the Ukraine, North Caucasus, Volga region and Kazakhstan
?
Holodomor can be linked to Ukraine.
Bogazicili (
talk)
09:26, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose to the Ottoman contraction article for being WP:UNDUE. One would also have to write about the Ottoman atrocities committed beforehand such as the Hamidian massacres and Bulgarian Horrors, it is POV pushing to omit these. And at this point the subject would be too long for a due weight in all of human history. KhndzorUtogh ( talk) 21:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Oppose the bloating of the article with details on the Colonial genocides. It caused eurocentric bias. Colonialism is "intrinsically genocidal" and so is the human history. Non-Europeans were not inferior in the task.
Above, it was suggested to reduce the topic of genocides to an overview similar to the genocide statement by the UN, and counter-argued that there is no place for such an overview in the article.
Perhaps, the article can end with a Summary where such statement is made. Arnold Toynbee mentions several professional historians who summarized the human history: "History is one damn thing after another." Edward Gibbon summed history up as "a little more than human criminal record." And he died before most of the genocides mentioned here.
Summary of human history can be premature, as history will not end soon and Wikipedia is not crystalball. But Summary can end open with two possibilities, one realistic and one fantastic.
This article has a lot (~70) of refs to books hosted at the Internet Archive, most of which are now unavailable due to a recent court ruling. How should we handle this? Remove the links to IA or leave them in place while the case is on appeal? Cerebellum ( talk) 11:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC)