Tatantyler (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Communicat (talk | contribs) →Renewal: comment added re edward321 |
||
Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
For a start, I propose improving and extending the lead, which is presently very unsatisfactory and arbitrary. I also suggest the title be changed from "Aftermath of WWII" to "WWII aftermath", so that it becomes more search-friendly. I propose also that the article be chronologically organised. At the moment it's disorganised and disjointed. To that end, it should start with Berlin occupation zones and post-war division of Germany, then Europe in general, Far East, decolonisation, etc, etc. [[User:Communicat|Communicat]] ([[User talk:Communicat|talk]]) 14:47, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
For a start, I propose improving and extending the lead, which is presently very unsatisfactory and arbitrary. I also suggest the title be changed from "Aftermath of WWII" to "WWII aftermath", so that it becomes more search-friendly. I propose also that the article be chronologically organised. At the moment it's disorganised and disjointed. To that end, it should start with Berlin occupation zones and post-war division of Germany, then Europe in general, Far East, decolonisation, etc, etc. [[User:Communicat|Communicat]] ([[User talk:Communicat|talk]]) 14:47, 13 October 2010 (UTC) |
||
Edward321, while conspicuously absenting himself from any discussion here, or from any previous contribution to this long-neglected article, has now disrupted and interferred with my attempt to improve and rework the lead / untitled section previously passing as a lead. My intention was to reincorporate the sourced data from the former disjointed and unsatisfactory "lead" into various other sections that have no sources whatsoever. While reverting my new lead, the party concerned has of course failed to provide a new lead himself, and he has disrupted and complicated my edits and intended edits to such an extent that it's become more or less impossible to sort out the chaotic mess he has created. Nice work Ed. [[User:Communicat|Communicat]] ([[User talk:Communicat|talk]]) 14:55, 25 October 2010 (UTC) |
Revision as of 14:56, 25 October 2010
Military history: World War II Start‑class | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Merge to Effects of World War II
Effects of World War II is more comprehensive and covers the same issues, often verbatim. Too much duplicity for 2 articles.Civil Engineer III 12:08, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.86.51 (talk) 14:09, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
you should it is very related —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.158.21.44 (talk) 16:57, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
- Is not, this should poop the way it is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bookworm415 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
1. The Aftermath of WWII is about the state of the world at the end. 2. The Effects of WWII cover the long lasting effects of the war. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.223.38 (talk) 01:44, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Effects and Aftermath are exactly the same thing. Having two separate articles is nothing but confusing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.59.9.32 (talk) 01:43, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
15 million Germans were expelled from eastern countries, the greatest ethnic cleansing in European history, after 800 years of German culture and history in those areas.--92.230.232.212 (talk) 18:35, 29 June 2010 (UTC) I think that we should clean up this article, and then merge with Effects of World War II. User:TatantylerNeed to talk to me?I'll be there. 01:51, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
Aftermath (of the Aftermath..?)
Let's not repeat that mistake again, making a section with that title. MBHiii (talk) 05:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Renewal
This discussion page has become dormant, but here goes, anyway. Aftermath section of WW2 overview article has been / is being revamped extensively following longrunning discussion with many valid and some invalid points raised and debated. I suggest the valid points be taken into consideration in renewing this main aftermath article.
Without going into detail at this time, I'll just say that merging with "Effects of WW2" is IMO not a practical idea. But this badly neglected article is definitly in need of a good cleanup and re-edit from top to bottom. I hope to do that, as and when time and collegiality (if any) permits. Rules of WP:CONS will hopefully apply.
For a start, I propose improving and extending the lead, which is presently very unsatisfactory and arbitrary. I also suggest the title be changed from "Aftermath of WWII" to "WWII aftermath", so that it becomes more search-friendly. I propose also that the article be chronologically organised. At the moment it's disorganised and disjointed. To that end, it should start with Berlin occupation zones and post-war division of Germany, then Europe in general, Far East, decolonisation, etc, etc. Communicat (talk) 14:47, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Edward321, while conspicuously absenting himself from any discussion here, or from any previous contribution to this long-neglected article, has now disrupted and interferred with my attempt to improve and rework the lead / untitled section previously passing as a lead. My intention was to reincorporate the sourced data from the former disjointed and unsatisfactory "lead" into various other sections that have no sources whatsoever. While reverting my new lead, the party concerned has of course failed to provide a new lead himself, and he has disrupted and complicated my edits and intended edits to such an extent that it's become more or less impossible to sort out the chaotic mess he has created. Nice work Ed. Communicat (talk) 14:55, 25 October 2010 (UTC)