Talk:Free World

message: The capital letters in (F)ree (W)orld are there intentionally to avoid confusion of this special term with what an average man would think of when hearing the words ``free world.
----
This page is politically loaded, not NPOV. There are plenty of people who do not accept the term "Free World", except as part of American political and journalistic rhetoric. Hotlorp 11:50 Apr 15, 2003 (UTC)
----
:This is in contrast with so-called Iron Curtain countries and other dictatorships which impose internal travel restrictions or restrict overseas and emigration. 
This description is highly inaccurate. In most European communist countries (I'm speaking mostly about Poland except during martial state, but many others were similar) there weren't any significant internal travel restrictions. There were some restrictions on international travel - it was more difficult to get a passport than it is today - but it wasn't like someone who wanted to emigrate couldn't do that. Taw 20:30, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I think the article Free World (World War II) is totally redundant and doesn't deserve its own article. It should simply be merged into this article, with all its contents transferred here.--Hibernian (talk) 17:47, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge request

message: The page :Leader of the Free World was nominated for deletion on 20 October 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was to redirect the page to Free World.
During deletion discussion, several editors suggested merging content from that page to this one, though some other editors objected. Content from Leader of the Free World may be accessed from its page history and added to Free World as appropriate. Cnilep (talk) 07:40, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Hearing no objections, I merged much of the content to this page. Cnilep (talk) 10:39, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leader of the Free World 

message: I'm just wondering whether the current map used on the page (Freedom House's Freedom Index) should be replaced by one that is more relevant. The page (with the exception of one small paragraph) refers to the "Free World" as the Western/NATO Bloc, so the map is essentially irrelevant. I think it should be replaced by something more relevant, perhaps with a map of the NATO and Warsaw Pact Blocs Jacob Cutts (talk) 05:10, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Irrelevant map? 

message: This article treats political propaganda and so is particularly prone to problems with neutral point of view. I would therefore appreciate opinions regarding these recent changes.
*In January 2016 User:Fireflyfanboy added reference to Time magazine calling Angela Merkel "Chancellor of the Free World" (diff).
*In November 2016 User:Tataral added two news op-ed pieces comparing Merkel and Donald Trump as "leader of the free world" (diff).
*In January 2017 User:Denarivs removed that paragraph noting, "undo weight for a fringe POV" (diff).
*I (Cnilep) undid that edit noting, "Might be pov, but that of the cited sources, not the WP editor" (diff). Denarvis and I then both edited the article, keeping the sources.
*A few days later User:Tataral edited the article, making it more similar to the November 2016 version (diff).
*In February an anonymous user at  removed the entire paragraph (diff). I reverted those edits noting, "Removed cited content; possible pov", and the anonymous user undid the revert noting, "removed opinion pieces" (diff).
I hope other editors as well as those mentioned above will comment so we can try to reach the most appropriate content. Cnilep (talk) 02:13, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I would support a sentence along the lines of "The term is not exclusive to American leaders, with Angela Merkel also listed as a contender for the title." But it's clear to me that the vast majority of the usage of the term over decades is with respect to the President of the United States, so anything other than a passing mention to other world leaders would be undue weight. Denarivs (talk) 02:25, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've restored the quote specifically about Merkel, and deleted any reference to Trump. I think that's a very easy compromise, and 's edits should not be taken seriously as they are an unregistered editor/only made 4 previous edits to Wikipedia.Fireflyfanboy (talk) 05:00, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that works well. Denarivs (talk) 01:10, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent additions and reverts 

message: I'm not clear if the "Free World" ever referred to all of the non-communist countries, or that it originated in the cold war rather than WWII.  The first sentence of this article is "The Free World is a term for the non-communist countries of the world that originated in the Cold War–era" without citation, yet, the first citation in this article is to a source describing the "free world" as the opponents of Nazi Germany during WWII and later the article states that the phrase has its origins in the 1940s during WWII from the anti-fascist Free World magazine and included both the US and Soviet Union (to some criticism).  So, the claim in the first sentences of the article is contradicted by later information in the article.  Further, the references to the cold war use of the term "free world" in the quote from the Atlantic makes it sound as if it referred specifically to the democratic non-communist countries, not to all of the non-communist countries.  As for how the term is used today, it seems relatively clear that the term does not refer to every country that is non-communist but to the nominally liberal democracies; Russia, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia and so on are all non-communist countries today but I don't think anyone using the term 'free world' would expect to include those illiberal or dictatorial countries.  I would suggest that unless someone has a good citation the term "non-communist" in the first sentence be changed to "liberal democratic" but non-communist be retained in the second sentence N0thingbetter (talk) 07:39, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "non-communist countries" and cold war 

message: The whole article is written with only Western knowledge of history and values.
E.g. the Communist movement mobilizing millions viewed themselves as freedom fighters against western 'imperialism', they highlighted values like job for everyone, health care, education and summer camps to everyone, forcing press to publish 'quality' information etc. as tools to liberate people from material misery.
Islamic countries see themselves as resisting western culture's lust and greed, which also chains persons.
I personally consider the West's view limiting liberty to the intellectual field as arbitrarily narrow, while disregarding need for material help to start achieving. N.11.6 (talk) 18:26, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article content is POV