Talk:Wilsonianism

Need merge / redefinition
Wilsonianism currently redirects to Idealism in international relations, which doesn't have that much to say about the eponymous Woodrow Wilson.

Wilsonian currently is a stub, but one which does mention Wilson's principles and policies.

We need to either

(1) Effectively merge Wilsonian and Idealism in international relations

or

(2) Make Wilsonian and Wilsonianism direct to the same page (I suppose "Wilsonianism" is the better choice), and make Idealism in international relations a separate page. (Of course, these pages may mention each other.)

Personally, I prefer option (2). -- Writtenonsand 20:33, 4 March 2006 (UTC) (sig added)


 * I support that. Option 2 gets my vote, too. - Mauco 21:09, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Biased point of view?
It seems, from my eye, that the following statement (the second setence of the paragraph) isn't in a neutral point of view. One can't really say what every person's motivations are in believing in something like Wilsonian principles, yet the second sentence seems to say that there is always some self-interest in such principles.

"Overall, Wilsonian principles are often characterized as being motivated by benevolence and ideology, rather than strict self-interest and fear. Though they are described this way they are in actuality also motivated by self-interest." —Preceding unsigned comment added by thesuperpower (talk • contribs)

Why does this article not use the noun form in the title?
The article should be located at "Wilsonianism". Dustin ( talk ) 04:29, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

How on Earth is this controversial? Literally almost every single ideological article on Wikipedia uses the noun form, so it is just ridiculous to have this located at an adjective for another week for hwat I expect to be next to no dissenters to show up! Dustin ( talk ) 19:03, 31 December 2014 (UTC)