Talk:Industrialisation

message: Quick search on google: There are 106 wikipedia article that use the american spelling "industrialization", but 46 with the british spelling "industrialisation", please consider moving this article.. (unsigned)
It doesn't really matter with a redirect yeah it doesn't.. do whatever you like, just mentioned most articles will link to "industrialization" (I will try to wikify them myself). And it seems like a much needed article (especially for history articles).. (unsigned)
BTW about half of the articles with the 's' are in french (le'industrialisation) and german (Industrialisation) etc. , so the numbers are much lower for the british spelling.. (unsigned)
: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) - all national standards of English spelling are acceptable on the English-language Wikipedia, both for titles and content. American spellings need not be respelled to British standards nor vice-versa; for example, either Aeroplane or Airplane is acceptable. (unsigned)
The article started out as Industrialisation, and this is where it should stay. SpNeo 22:26, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That might prove difficult. I suggest the word 'industrialization'. Vote? WinterSpw (talk) 23:41, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Nvm, the article's fine now. WinterSpw (talk) 22:50, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:ENGVAR. If the article started with British spelling (as it did in the very first edit), and there is no strong tie to the U.S., then the spelling should be strictly British throughout the article. No straw polls, no appeals to how widely one or the other spelling is used in the world. Edison (talk) 00:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

text: British english is old english. Use American. 2600:100F:B1B3:613B:0:1A:5615:F601 (talk) 22:53, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: US/UK spelling

message: See the last paragraph. It has scare quotes and is not worded neutrally. Eyu100(t|fr|Version 1.0 Editorial Team) 16:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV

message: umm...
"Industrialisation (also spelled Industrialization) or an Industrial Revolution is a process of social and economic change whereby a human group is transformed from a pre-industrial society (an economy where the amount of capital accumulated per capita is low) to an industrial one (a fully developed capitalist economy)"
It seems to me that this implies that a capitalist ecomomy is a requisite for a fully emerged industrial society,
which I don't think that industrialization is limited to the capitalist economic system. e.g. communist industrialized societies.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.1.103.99 (talk) 22:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: capitalism a requisite for industrialization?

message: The majority of this article is either confusing in reason and logic or lacking references. I suggest the article be improved by these criteria. WinterSpw (talk) 01:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Article needs dire cleanup

message: I added a tag to link to the Reindustrialization article. That article isn't the best yet, but considering that reindustrialization is relevant to industrialization, it seems worth mentioning. Note any disagreements here. GreySun (talk) 12:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Linked to Reindustrialization

message: The majority of this article sounds like it was written by a crazed Friedmanite. Industrialisation is not a purely economic issue. Also, it seems that someone or some people have suppressed all negative aspects of industrialisation - the extremely brief section on the environment, the complete hotlinking away for the exploitation section, and no section on sustainability / depletion of resources required for the process to continue.
I'd like the economic hotheads to stop biasing every goddamn page in wikipedia with their insidious, pro-capitalism lunacy. Please and thank you. Be realistic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.69.66.116 (talk) 05:03, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Myopic focus on economic aspects

message: The rapid increase in the transportation of hazardous chemicals has enhanced the accident potential during transit. In transit, the goods would subject to impact, vibration, compression and other adverse effects and exposure to harmful environment. The other factors such as improper packing of the contents, poor storage may also lead to release of chemicals to the environment resulting in emergencies like fire, explosion, toxic release, etc.
This module is for the following target groups:
Traffic Police
Industries
Transporters
Emergency Managers
Fire Fighters
Drivers  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.211.130.45 (talk) 11:08, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: TRANSPORT INDUSTRIAL DIASTER

message: I have replaced the images at the top of the article. The watt steam image , although historically relevant gives the impression that industrialisation is a thing of the past. I hope the graphs give a better impression of its dynamic and continuing nature. The watt steam image is now in the history section where it is a better illustration. Lumos3 (talk) 12:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Heading images

message: One is redirected to this article from Industrial age. The ages of human and societal evolution are less well defined than the ruling kings of England, say. Still, just as an article on a king would list the kings immediately preceeding and following that king, it would make sense to have some form of pointer to preceeding and following ages here. In particular, a reference to the information age would be natural -- including a brief paragraph mentioning reservations to a claim that industrialisation is over and replaced by information.--Nø (talk) 10:35, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information age 

message: In the first chart you want to show "The effect of Industrialisation shown by rising income levels since 1500. The graph shows the gross domestic product (at purchasing power parity) per capita between 1500 and 1950 in 1990 International dollars for selected nations.[1]".
This is nonsense, because GDP per capita can be achieved by trade, services or agricultural production also, not necessarily by industrial production. I suggest the chart gets deleted and someone finds a similar chart with "industrial production per capita". 178.2.247.88 (talk) 22:43, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  GDP is no measurement for industrialisation.  

message: I believe that there could be a substantial amount of information added to improve how comprehensive the article is. For instance, there could be an outline of the progression of industrialization and the way that it has grown since the term was first created. The article currently does a good job of providing the basics, but as it is supposed to be an article in an encyclopedia which is meant to give the reader a comprehensive view into a subject, it would be off merit to be more thorough in the explanation of the topic. For instance, under the heading "social consequences" and the sub headings beneath that, each subject only has one or two sentences to describe it which is not sufficient to give a comprehensive view of industrialization. Furthermore, there is no section that describes the social benefits of the age. There should also be references made to the environmental and political effects of industrialization as well so that the article isn't seen to be leaning towards one side. Afaniran (talk) 06:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. There was an undiscussed split in March 2015 here to History of industrialisation. This could be reversed due to the lack of discussion and then the article developed as suggested above. Whizz40 (talk) 05:31, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll go ahead and recombine them. Whizz40 (talk) 22:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comprehensive Discussion 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Industrialisation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520045610/http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/details.asp?id=5752&title=jobs-growth-poverty-employment to http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/details.asp?id=5752&title=jobs-growth-poverty-employment
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:21, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified