Talk:Americanization

message: At the end of the paragraph 'Media and popular culture', Elvis and Michael Jackson are noted as selling over 500 million albums, yet Michael Jackson is somehow "best-selling" at 100 million albums. One of the figures is wrong, presumably. NimbleJack (talk) 06:04, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That is bullshit! 89.21.56.93 (talk) 09:10, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, it was an accident. 89.21.56.93 (talk) 09:12, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect Figures?

message: What we need here is a picture of someone eating a McDonald's sandwich in front of a cinema with blockbuster posters, preferably on the Champs Elysees or something like that... Jules LT 21:25, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Americanization's two meanings are completely distinct, so I think the article should be split into
*Americanisation(assimilation) (purely US phenomenon, so you have US spelling)
*and Americanization(influence)
Or something like that. The first one would be quickly populated with the US-specific information in cultural assimilation and the information in melting pot that isn't specific to the word. Jules LT 15:23, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: US spelling would be with a "z", and UK with a "S", so shouldn't it be Americanization(assimilation) and Americanisation(influence) (the latter being a phenomenon said to affect non-US countries)? Andjam 15:21, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right. Anyway, this article must be split. I wish I had the time Jules.LT 17:12, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The article should be split, but I'm in the same boat as Jules here.ProfessorFokker 09:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  influence of culture / assimilation of immigrants split 

message: The Harem Jutsu was intact in the Naruto dub, so the example really doesn't work. I'm too lazy to find another example, could someone else do this? SA9097
....What are you talking about?
:Don't be meanies, he's askings a question >< he mighta justs put it in the wrong place or stuffies...I don't watch Naruto so I dunnos..maybes you could try asking your question on the Naruto page? o.o ~ SnuggleBunny 19:24, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  /* Anime */ 

message: The entire "Media" section talks about changing material for the American culture, while both definitions at the top define Americanization as changing culture itself to become more American. Neither the American culture nor the American audience, can become Americanized. Neither can the culture which provided the material that's changed. The BBC wouldn't have been Americanized if NOVA had changed "maize" to "corn". And if the BBC isn't forced to change, then there's no Americanization occurring, according to the two definitions provided.
Is the answer to this contradiction to add a new definition which means making something from another culture palatable to American audiences or consumers? The disambig argument gets stronger, if that's done. 198.49.180.40 19:37, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article contradicts itself, or at least is incomplete. 

message: I had hoped for far more from this article: sample questions from U.S. citizenship exams, statistics on United States novels in foreign translation, or a survey of U.S. television shows in international syndication. Quite frankly this page says far more about the spread of American culture than what I read here - and the few assertions about United States media are unsourced and dubious. One could dispute the claims by noting how the United States is one of the few countries where the standard method of screening foreign language films is with subtitles rather than dubbing, or by tracking the influence that international box office receipts have had in de-Americanizing American motion pictures, or by contesting that Hollywood remakes certain foreign language pictures for economic rather than cultural reasons: the United States is the only country whose domestic market is large enough to finance the highest level of production values. Having read that section with gritted teeth, I scrolled down in search of something better and found nothing. Surely this article could improve. 72.199.30.31 10:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  OR? 

message: The Americanization page and the other Americanization page are basically the same thing. They should be merged into one article entitled Americanization. Also, in the Americanization (immigration) page, the trivia section says the exact same thing as the Americanization (foreign culture and media) page does. I'm somewhat of a Wikipedia noob, and I've never merged an article or anything, but I guess I'll attempt it now or in the near future...or should I wait for a response...? Ah, whatever I'm just going to leave this comment and if nothing happens for a few days I'll probably just try merging them myself. I'm not even sure if I wrote my signature properly :(– Arnesh 02:43 16 November 2006
: I think it would be better to make disambiguation page as it has more than one meaning. GeoW 10:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging of Articles 

message: I woud like to see a section on the Americanization of the English language i.e. usin Z's in stead of S's center versus centre etc etc "Snorkel | Talk" 09:17, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because of American influence English words are becoming common virtually in all the languages of the world. Not even to mention this fact in the article is a big omission. Also, wearing jeans and baseball caps can be considered a sign of Americanization, as well as the popularity of rock music, hip-hop, jazz, and such genres as westerns and gangster movies. The article is obviously written by people who hate America and who want to create an impression that the American influence in the world is limited to silly things such as Coca-Cola. Пипумбрик (talk) 18:06, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language 

message: I've commented out the writing systems tag. Can anyone justify this tag at all? If not, I'll entirely remove it. – FrederikVds 14:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Writing systems

message: IMO, this should be moved to Americanisation. This article applies to all countries in the world, except the US, so using US spelling is a little paradoxical. – FrederikVds 14:38, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oppose per WP:ENGVAR. Of course this article concerns the United States - its actions are what cause the phenomenon internationally. Americanization can be observed in the immigrant population of the United States as well. It's not necessary to move from a stable title here. Dekimasuよ! 02:16, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: That can of soda picture at the beginning, doesn't look like a real soda brand. I think it is from a television program of film. Do you actually think there is a brand of soda called "U.S. Soda"??? It's clearly not an authentic example. If you are going to have an example, it should be of something that isn't from a set. Contralya 21:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just saying... 

message: IMHO this article seems to be more about America's achievements and seems to be somewhat boastful. It doesn't seem to have much to do with 'Americanisation'. I think you'll find that 'Americanisation' has more of a negative meaning around the world, as most people see it as an intrusion on their own cultures. I think that this article should be changed to convey that. I don't mean to offend anyone, but what I say is pretty much a universal truth. Zestos (talk) 22:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  American boasts 

message: "Before the mid-twentieth century, however, Americanization referred to the process by which immigrants became American."
This is flat out untrue. This is still the primary meaning of the word.
To have the article tossing it aside in a sentence to concentrate on a secondary and only in recent use meaning is non-neutral POV. Goldfritha (talk) 01:26, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I support your sentiment, in that the text is original research and unsourced. We should simply explain that the word has two meanings. Further to that, and to hopefully avoid the article leaning too far the other way, I feel it's worth pointing out that to call that the primary meaning of the word fails another Wikipedia requirement: the taking of a global view. Outwith the U.S., it may not be; certainly for me as a European/Brit/Scot, it's not a use I'd ever heard or considered. The "late twentieth century" definition is the primary definition from my POV! ;) – Kieran T (talk) 01:40, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: I got here folowing a link from the "full monty" WP entry, where this is refered to a british musical getting adapted for the US market. Like the popular remakes of "the office" for example or japanese movies ("the ring"). It makes sense to me, but not being a native speaker I don't know if it's correct. But its almost the opposite of what the artcle describes now. Could anyone clarify? 85.178.17.1 (talk) 20:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Different meaning?

message: The entire photo album consists exclusively of fast food restaurants around the world, for obvious reasons it should be expanded.
Any ideas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.174.35.241 (talk) 19:42, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Expanding the Wikimedia

message: This article is in good direction, just need more info. Overall very good direction as it stands right now. Need more examples, especially American pop culture examples. 97.124.255.168 (talk) 03:06, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Direction

message: The article states "Hollywood, the American film industry, dominates most of the world's cinema markets (India is an exception with Bollywood). It is the chief medium by which people across the globe see American fashions, customs, scenery and way of life." Do people in other countries see American culture more in Hollywood films than in the many US television shows broadcast worldwide? Maybe so, but is there a source for this? It seems like a bold claim.Hobson (talk) 23:22, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm Belgian and I say that this whole article is complete nonsense. There is no Americanisation going on anymore. We are more exposed to British music (look at the European music charts, few or no American artists are there) and television. It's true that many films are from Hollywood, but even that is waning (my own experience/feeling). American television programs used to be more popular in the 90s, but since then I rarely even see them anymore. They have been replaced by local productions, British productions or French ones. The English that is used in European countries is a mix of British and American English. We never say 'mart', but we do always say 'shop'. Children programming is dominated by local productions and Japanese ones. Music by the British (in general). Films by Americans. Technology by Eastern-Asians and Americans. Cars by Germans and the French. Food (highly depending on the country) is here not particularly Americanised. We don't have Burgerking, we don't have all those fastfood shops. We only have MacDonalds and Quick (which is French by the way). We have our own supermarkets, which are mainly from France, Belgium or Germany (Delhaize, Lidl, Aldi, Carefour, etc).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.117.249.20 (talk) 16:57, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  TV is so old-fashioned in 2015.  I wonder what the impact in Belgian is of Americanization through Google, Facebook, Twitter and the iPhone?   Has Uber arrived in Belgium yet? Rjensen (talk) 04:25, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Hollywood more influential than television?

message: Such American inventions as the Internet, Facebook, Google, EBay, Twitter, etc. are very influential all over the world. In fact, they are changing the world for the better, as the events in the Arab world show. Isn't it necessary to mention these facts in the article?Пипумбрик (talk) 00:45, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I would avoid taking credit for the invention of the internet as we know it. A Brit invented the World Wide Web ;-) Zestos (talk) 23:44, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The Internet was an American invention and was already in full operation in 1971, 18 years BEFORE Berners-Lee (the Brit) wrote the http coding scheme for www. Credit for WWW goes to CERN, an international agency based in Switzerland which employed him & his coauthor. credit for Internet goes to US Defense Department. Rjensen (talk) 01:17, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Internet

message: The entire Criticism section of this article is based on an opinion piece by Allan Brian Ssenyonga. According to the cited website, http://www.globalenvision.org/library/33/1273, he is an Ugandan freelance writer for The New Times, an English daily in Rwanda. Is his opinion a widely accepted position/opinion?
Also, most of the section is a copy and paste from one paragraph in the cited opinion article at http://www.globalenvision.org/library/33/1273. Compare the first sentence of the section in Wikipedia to the source that reads "Critics now say globalization is nothing more than the imposition of American culture on the entire world." This is almost an exact copy and who exactly are these critics? The "critics" are not named.
The entire second sentence of the section is copy and pasted from the cited source, including the missing period after "U.S.A" [sic].
This is from the source: "Proponents of the school of thought contend that countries like U.S.A are using the globalization as an engine of "corporate imperialism"; one which tramples over the human rights of developing societies, claims to bring prosperity, yet often simply amounts to plundering and profiteering."
Compare the third sentence of the section to this text from the cited source: "some people are now arguing that globalization has mainly benefited the already strong economies of the world and it has given them leverage to not only trade with the rest of the world but to also influence their general lifestyles and politics." Again, copy and pasted from the source.
Does a freelance writer citing unnamed critics warrant being the entire Criticism section especially when the section appears to be mostly plagiarized?--Ewoip (talk) 03:42, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critcism section 

message: "While not necessarily a hostile term, it is most often used by critics in the target country worried about the tendency."Or, you know, people might not like the American values etc. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 19:38, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording 

message: This article primarily revolves around attitudes towards Americanisation in Europe. There are cursory mentions of China, Mexico and South Korea, but nothing about a single country in Africa, South America, nor many other countries with significant populations and economies (India, Japan, Indonesia, Canada, Australia etc.). I find this bizarrely narrow sighted, and it's emblematic of a problem across the English language Wikipedia: Western-centricity, and a total pre-occupation with a select few countries. Could we please work to make this article, and many other articles like it, a broader, more global view of their subjects, with credible references and viewpoints from outside the anglosphere? 148.64.28.93 (talk) 14:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Globalise 

message: This text is the translation of a german text published in (peer reviewed) Sociologia Internationalis I 2018, Bonn.
--Azenofzof (talk) 19:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further Reading / Zenklusen Stefan 

message: The redirect Negotiating free trade agreements between the US and other nations involves screen quotas has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Fram (talk) 14:28, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Negotiating free trade agreements between the US and other nations involves screen quotas]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: — Assignment last updated by Dbdcrochet23 (talk) 19:20, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: History of Immigration to the U.S.