In this article we will address the issue of Talk:Revolution, which has become very relevant today. Talk:Revolution is a topic that has aroused the interest of various sectors, both nationally and internationally. Over the years, Talk:Revolution has been the subject of studies and research that have yielded surprising results. In this sense, it is pertinent to investigate the different aspects surrounding Talk:Revolution, as well as its implications and consequences. From a multidisciplinary approach, we will explore the various angles that Talk:Revolution offers, with the purpose of deepening our understanding and providing a comprehensive vision of this very relevant topic.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Revolution article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Revolution was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. 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.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that although scholars have studied revolutions(depiction) for over a century, there are still many competing theories explaining those key events in human history?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
] The anchor (#Difficulties with elections) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.
The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links.
Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error
Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2023
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The image in the quick preview of any link that redirects to this page has an image of a fly feeding on faeces. This is clearly an act of vandalism and the quick preview image should be one that is appropriate to the topic, i.e. the Delacroix painting that appears on the article itself. 2001:818:C413:E700:F1C6:DE21:2B7D:1F3C (talk) 19:22, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
In progress: An editor is implementing the requested edit. Known issue, is being worked on. It's unclear what exactly is happening, but the important people who understand this stuff know about it :) Actualcpscm (talk) 20:00, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I propose merging Social Revolution into Revolution. As the two articles are structured, there is no difference in how revolution is understood and defined. If there are nuanced differences, then those differences can be fleshed out in Revolution. As it stands, the existing of two separate articles leads to duplicated content and worse article quality. Thenightaway (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose — "Social revolution" is a specific classification within revolution studies in fields such as history and philosophy. Revolutions do not always bring changes in societal structures or systems. If anything, the definition in the lead of this article (Revolution) should be more general initially and then describe specific classifications like social revolution. Social revolution is not "different" from revolution; social revolution is a type of revolution. Yue🌙21:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose. The article isn't great, but social revolutions are a distinct and notable enough concept to require an independent article. The term "social revolution" gets no less than 234,000 hits on Google Scholar. --Grnrchst (talk) 17:39, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose — If we look to the International Encyclopedia of Political Science, for the entry on "Revolutions" we find "social revolutions" referred to multiple times as specific and unique form of revolutions that is an important area of research. We also find "social revolutions" come up specifically in the entries for "Terrorist groups", "Communist parties", "Comparative methods", "Democracy", "Feminist movements", and "Marxism". So it is evidently viewed as an important and distinct form of revolution by multiple leading academics, this along with Grnrchst's point show how it is something worthy of it's own article on Wikipedia, even if the current article is lacking. --Cdjp1 (talk) 21:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
In progress: An editor is implementing the requested edit. Known issue, is being worked on. It's unclear what exactly is happening, but the important people who understand this stuff know about it :) Actualcpscm (talk) 20:00, 1 April 2023 (UTC)