Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global civilization

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete and redirect to Cosmopolitan. Sr 13 04:58, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Global civilization[edit]

The term is a non-notable neologism, while the article itself has no context nor verfiable sources. --Gavin Collins 08:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. The article has gained no incoming links since it was drafted 2½ years ago. Google finds plenty of hits for the two words together (a pretty common adjective-noun conmbination) but none for the concept as a distinct phrase. Kim Dent-Brown ^{(Talk to me)} 11:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that the primary author of the article, Roy da Vinci (talk · contribs), is attempting to document a new idea of world political unity that xe thinks has been invented in the late 20th century. In fact, this isn't a new idea. People have been talking about and proposing unified world governments for a long time, as world government in fact says. Herbert George Wells wrote about world governments in The Outline of History, published in 1921, on pages 1090–1191. (Here's irony for you. An editor without an account pointed out Wells' book in the article in 2005. An editor with an account immediately edited it out as a "moronic theory".) The Parliamentary Association for World Government was founded in 1950 and the World Parliament Association in 1952. Benjamin Franklin Trueblood wrote a book, The Federation of the World, proposing a world government in 1899.
This article is a load of unsourced rubbish and a hypothesis invented directly by Wikipedia editors based upon a false premise. Delete. Uncle G 13:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete. Possibly related to New World Order.--Edtropolis 14:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletions. -- Gavin Collins 09:14, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 10:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect The concept is not new. The idea is covered in the article Cosmopolitan already. The page Global civilization can redirect to that article. Since the article does not state any sources merging information into the Cosmopolitan article might not be too wise. doxTxob \ ^talk 03:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Redirect. as per DoxTxob.--Edtropolis 20:41, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Accidently voted again.--Edtropolis 20:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.