Talk:Geopolitics

message: This article seriously needs some editing. --Colipon 23:43, 18 Aug 2003 (UTC)

message: Too bad the image was taken down, it really buffed up the article. Ksenon 06:27, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: This aritcle is focused almost completely on Mackinder's Heartland Theory, which has its own seperate article.  Much of this information should probably be either moved or slimmed down to leave room for the many other geopolitical models/theories. Joshdboz 11:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs Seperation 

message: This is a rediculous suggestion, critical geography - to the extent to which it can be labeled - encompasses a wide range of geographical topics, not just the political. Geography is poorly written about on Wikipedia as it is, without removing an aritcle. Robdurbar 09:01, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Robdurbar, critical geography is a recent critique of a positivist direction in geography, whereas geopolitics is a quite old branch of international relations, and not necessarily particulary critical of positivism even. If this article should be merged with anything (and I don't think it should), it should at least be something that is part of the same academic tradition; critical geography is not particulary relevant for International Relations and vice versa. --Jakob mark 16:18, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

text: There is a possibilty for a merge with political geography, which at the moment is crap, though I'm attempting to write a decent version in my sandbox, which may perhaps remvoe the need for two. The Geopolitik article is also in vast need of improvement (personal beielf is the geography is one of Wikipedia's worst areas) Robdurbar 18:50, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Absolutely and totally agree. And utterly absurd suggestion. Icundell 13:57, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  If the two articles should be merged, wouldn't it be more logical to use this one as the starting point, since it does include significantly more information than political geography? --Jakob mark 01:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Geopolitics is the historical science and paradigm, and it makes me think of warfare, military strategy and alliances. Political geography is a sub-field within human geography that deals with power mechanisms, administrative borders and decision-making processes and their influence on (and by) the land. //Big Adamsky 01:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

text: They are certainly seperate things, but its also true that well written articles on the two would repeat info quite a bit, at least in their history sections. And unfortuntely geopolitics is still very much alive, if only in the military... Robdurbar 08:50, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

text: From what I have been taught, current meaning of geopolitics extends to both cultural (human) and physical geography. As has already been said, the term was created in the early 1900s. The inclusive meaning of the term began in the late 1960s as physical geographical factors and cultural geographical factors became causally related (i.e. Korean War, Vietnam War, Gulf War) Today, the term is used to include the historical context, legal modifications/implications, spatial location, and information distribution over a given area. Thus, this includes geography-related legislation, geography-influenced or related legal precedents, lobbying, and policies. Effectively, geopolitics is the relationship between the physical and cultural environment of an area and political motives, legal precedents, and domestic and international policy. The use of the word geopolitics is far more encompassing than it used to be, and is often used in combination of other information to distinguish precise meaning. From my experience, it seems military campaigns, campaign maps, international policies that are geography-related (The Kyoto Protocol), the United Nations, and other examples are included in the currently used meaning of geopolitics. I think that these articles should remain separate. Geopolitics is an accepted term in is own right. Mappychris 06:18, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Excellent - I've removed the merge tag, as it seems like none of us want it. Robdurbar 09:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge With Critical Geography

message: I have expanded the article on Critical Geopolitics, and was wondering if people think Critical Geopolitics should be mentioned in the "other theories" section and/or the "see also" section? In any case, it would be good if any geographers amongst you would take a look at the Critical Geopolitics page as it stands. Thanks Andrew.boulton 21:39, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think Cirtical geopolitics should be part of the article; its why I put the expansion tag on the page! --Robdurbar 09:39, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

text: It deserves a link, but is separate from Geopolitics itself as it's essentially a postmodern critique of it. -crafty bison  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.219.196.212 (talk) 10:59, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critical Geopolitics 

message: The definition of geopolitics is contested and largely impossible since it is also popularly used to refer to action taken in pursuit of territorial control. We need to use the tripartite definition introduced by critical geopolitics. Also astounding there's no section here on contemporary geopolitics - Uzbekistan, Global war on terror etc. -crafty bison  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.219.196.212 (talk) 11:02, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: This is not a proper noun. It is the name of a discipline and so, like the names for the disciplines of economics, sociology, history, literature, chemistry, etc, should be in lower case except when other contexts (appearing as the first word of a sentence, etc) require upper case. Interlingua 02:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Geopolitics' in lower case, please 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Geopolitics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100331010905/http://compass.seacadets.org:80/pdf/nrtc/bmr/14325_ch20.pdf to http://compass.seacadets.org/pdf/nrtc/bmr/14325_ch20.pdf
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120324220119/http://www.thenortherntimes.com.au/news/lifestyle/entertainment/books/neostatecraft-and-metageopolitics-lit-books-switzerland/1991055.aspx to http://www.thenortherntimes.com.au/news/lifestyle/entertainment/books/neostatecraft-and-metageopolitics-lit-books-switzerland/1991055.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:11, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Geopolitics. 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/20120314153951/http://www.gcsp.ch/Globalisation/Publications/Faculty-Publications/Books-and-Edited-Volumes/Neo-statecraft-and-Meta-geopolitics-Reconciliation-of-Power-Interests-and-Justice-in-the-21st-Century to http://www.gcsp.ch/Globalisation/Publications/Faculty-Publications/Books-and-Edited-Volumes/Neo-statecraft-and-Meta-geopolitics-Reconciliation-of-Power-Interests-and-Justice-in-the-21st-Century
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) 00:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Kya hai Kkswain1234 (talk) 10:45, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uno