User talk:WakenightM

My question/discussion has to do with the article that I edited for the page "Third World"

In the article, it says that the term has a complex history and the meaning has been lost. It describes the term as being categorical, for it divides nations based on social, political, cultural and economic differences. I think this is an over broad statement, as the original meaning of the term was really just meant to highlight the political differences (specifically those in Africa and Asia). Yes, all of these categories are interrelated, but I'm wondering if that description is too general. It seems to still pose a sort of 'negative connotation' rather than an analysis of the true meaning of the term, which was not a negative one but positive.

Recent edit to Clark Weber
Hello. I noticed that you made an edit to a biography of a living person (Clark Weber), but that you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! Materialscientist (talk) 22:42, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Apartheid: Petty v. Grand
My discussion has to do with the definition of petty apartheid.

in the article 'Apartheid' it seems as if the description of 'petty' apartheid is what is actually describing 'grand apartheid' I did not want to delete the whole definition, but I do believe that grand apartheid is what is more so focused on the laws in Africa that separated people. Such laws included the forbiddance of interracial marriages.